Put gay marriage on the ballot, Christie says
"Let the people of New Jersey decide what's right for the state," he said.
Put gay marriage on the ballot, Christie says
Matt Katz, Inquirer Staff Writer
Christie at a town hall meeting earlier this month in Voorhees. (SHARON GEKOSKI-KIMMEL / Staff Photographer)
UPDATE: For the full story in today's paper, click here.
As Democrats held a hearing this afternoon in Trenton on a gay marriage bill, Republican Gov. Christie held a press conference in Bridgewater with a surprise announcement: He wants the gay marriage question put on the November ballot as a proposed constitutional amendment.
Otherwise, he said, he will veto the Democrats' bill. Alternatively, a statewide referendum would be the most democratic way to make such a sweeping societal change, he said.
"Let the people of New Jersey decide what's right for the state," he said.
Saying some elements in the Democratic party want to use the issue as a "political football," he said "the issue is too big and too consequential."
He urged every legislative Republican to support a bill to put the question on the ballot. Putting the proposal before voters would require a three-fifths vote from the Democrat-controlled Legislature.
Otherwise, if Democrats send him a gay marriage bill to sign: "I will veto it. Let's be clear."
"It's bigger than just the word" marriage, he said. "It's hundreds of years of tradition, both legally, societally and religiously. And that's what I'm standing up for."
At a news conference earlier this month in which Democrats announced their attention to make this the legislative priority of the year, they said the gay marriage question should not be decided on the ballot because "civil rights issues" should be decided by Legislatures.
And Sen. Ray Lesniak (D., Union), a sponsor of the bill, just issued this statement referencing the sports betting referendum that went on the ballot in November: “Marriage equality isn't like sports betting. It's a civil right which is already guaranteed in our Constitution. It's up to the Legislature to guarantee these rights and support marriage equality for same sex couples.”
Comments (85)
Homosexual Marriage will bring the TRUTH to Public Forum.. The Avereage age of Death of a Male Homosexual is 43 years Young!The Homosexual Database at WCU states that definition of MONOGOMOUS in Gay Database is 3 or Fewer Partners at one time.. These are facys needed to educate public— Kevinmac- Here we go with the hysterical closet cases. You're quoting the long-debunked Cameron "study," I see. The one where two guys looked for obituaries and news stories about deaths in traditionally gay urban newspapers in the 1990s (when people were still dying from AIDS in droves), added up the total and divided by the number of deaths. Now that's what I call "scientific research." — phillyskyline
- Well, at 47 I guess I already beat the odds! And you are a freak. I live in NJ and trust me, if put on the ballot it will pass! — Glen Estevan
- In an attempt to not make it a "political football" Christie does precisely that. Another example of talking out of both sides of his mouth. It's a populist ploy that politicizes the issue. Does this guy's hypocrisy have no bounds? That's a rhetorical question by the way.— amg
- MARRIAGE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RELIGION IN THE EYES OF THE STATE. Religion should have absolutely no impact on this decision. It's a legal matter. I can go get married by Elvis in Las Vegas; stop being sanctimonious about marriage. It's a legal matter.— th
- Because putting the legal rights of a minority up to a vote by the majority has always worked out so well.— phillyskyline
- You cannot put minority civil rights up to a vote....what if the majority had decided in a vote that you cannot marry across race? And considering how straight people treat marriage, they are hypocrites ...Kim Kardashian anyone? Britney Spears anyone?— MercerCty
- Why not let the voters decide? Having something dictated by the few through back-door court legislation is wrong....why are democrats always afraid to have the people vote?— Big Gulps
- Cool. And while we're at it, how about we just go ahead and overturn Loving v. Virginia, reinstate the anti-miscengenation laws, and make interracial marriage illegal again? Nobody needs those activist judges, anyway. — phillyskyline
- Fundamental rights is not supposed to be up for majority vote. Just not the way it works. Once you open that up your republic is dead. Or it's Myanmar. Or both. — mmaglich
- Put it to a vote. It will pass.— BillStrash
- Good move on Christie's part! He's kicked the ball back into the liberal Dems side of the field. So now they either have to put up or shut up. If, as has been reported on on Philly.com, the majority of NJ voters support gay marriage, its a non-issue and will easily pass. Can't wait to see how the Libs/Dems try to spin this one.— psyrus
- oh please hysterical people, Chris Christie cannot sign a gay marriage bill. He would be defeated in a primary. This is the only way to do it.— Northeaster
- this guy is just looking for votes or he's gay I don't know. He's not as good has people think he is. I would not vote for him.— ott
- Looks to me as if NJ residents already did vote on this. They voted for representatives who were willing to write and pass a law making gay marriage legal. If the residents do not agree they can vote those politicians out of office and the new ones can repeal the law.— Ed G
- what a joke. i thought christie was all gay friendly with his NJ supreme court appointee. looks like he isn't very gay rights after all.— slanted and enchanted
- God created marriage for man and women. Everything else belongs to satan.— J3player
- That's might be what your particular religion might say (although Scripture is open to interpretation too), but not science. — tom-104
- You're seriously a crackpot — djrtwilight1987
- Is that a typo, J3, or did you intend to only approve the man (singular) to marry women (plural) and everything else belongs to satan?u b a clever 3player (HTML deleted) — bosco11
- Is that a typo, J3, or did you intend to only approve the man (singular) to marry women (plural) and everything else belongs to satan?
u b a clever 3player— bosco11 - NJ residents also voted Christie as gov. They voted for him knowing he would veto any bill making gay marriage legal. If the residents did not agree they could have voted for Corzine.— Fred Berry
- Gov. Christie picks an issue to put to a vote that he knows will not likely pass - what a great governor, I mean divider...— ksam
- If it goes on the ballot, the Mormons will pump millions into a media campaign in an attempt to defeat the measure.— tdoc
- "It's bigger than just the word" marriage, he said. "It's hundreds of years of tradition, both legally, societally and religiously. And that's what I'm standing up for." What say you on the DIVORCE and ADULTERY Christie? How about we put the legality of those up for a vote? The right of same-sex couples to get married already exists in the Constitution. They are only fighting for it to be legally recognized, as it should. That is the responsibility of the Legislature, not the public. Christie just wrote himself off to a 1 term Governorship.— ChrisElliottWasRight
- You can’t let the gays get married! That would destroy the sanctity of marriage. I mean just ask the Republican moral standard Newt Gingrich - Leave your fist wife when she's diagnosed with cancer, ask your second wife for an open marriage so you can finally get to your third wife...once it gets to the third one then it's sacred.— johnny6
- better idea. remove 'Marriage' from the laws and replace with 'Civil Union'. everything is a civil union anyway. if you want to call it a marriage, that would be between you, your spouse and your religious institution.— palmyra21
- How does gay marriage effect any one or anyones marriage ? It doesn't . So why are people making such a big deal out of nothing . There are bigger things to be worried about . Like jobs, economy , murders , homicides , and of course if you have enough toilet paper. Thats a biggie .You never know when your gonna have a huge blizzard and be snowed in and run out of toilet paper. Anyways people move on with your lives. and get a hobby .— djrtwilight1987
- THe Dems know that the oxymoron of gay marriage is defeated when put to a vote. That was not the headline issue they were voted in for. The fact of the matter is that it is not marriage as defined in any way. It is a perversion of the human body. Look at the Netherlands - they have had this legal for years and the average "marriage" is 18 months. Activists never want truth to enter the picture. With all the issues facing the state and nation, they are centered on trying to change what is obvious and further bring down the wrath of God on a society that delights is creating an upside-down world where right is wrong and wrong is right. The voters are not always right, but they often can tell bad legislation when they see it.— JOHN THE NEWSHOUND
- Just put it to a vote and let it become law. I'm entitle to the same rights as everyone else. I vote, pay taxes and treat each human with respect as I would want to be treated. The time has come!— cdovidio
- While I actually think "gay marriage" (which is an offensive term to begin with since there's no "straight marriage") would pass in NJ if given a popular vote, the idea of letting the majority decide civil rights issues is ludicrous. That's not how civil rights work. Christie is pandering. I thought he had more spine than this.— TakeBackPhilly
- Amen, J3player - Now everything is allowed and ok. Gay Marriage, Raping little children in the shower,Slavery,Drug Abuse where do we draw the line and say enough is enough. Or we trying to see how many people we can get into Hell— Lycan
- "Lycan"??? Isnt that a name for a werewolf? — tdoc
- I agree with palmyra21, time to replace marriage on all government forms with civil union or just union. Doesn't matter who it is but it makes a legally binding agreement between two persons, regardless of sex, that when terminated prior to death must also be dealt with legally as divorce is now. You can still get married, just marriage will be where it should be, in the religious term, not in governments.— sjnative94
- @j3player: God didn't create marriage for a man and a woman! Get your facts straight. Marriage was created by man as a contract between two people. The Church then decided that it was sanctified by god, being on the line with the almight and all, and therefore it became a sacrement. It was a way of making money for the greedy establishment, known as the catholic church. That's the reason the clergy can't marry too. All their worldly belongings would go to their heirs, not the church. The church could then declare that the clergy (except for popes and bishops and their like) should live in poverty.
Those of you who continue to spout this ignorance, I'm sure, already know that at one point, men got women pregnant before they'd marry them in order to ensure they could have children.
Know you're history. Marriage is a civil contract. It's ridiculous that the majority should vote on the civil rights of the minority. If we thought that way, Jim Crowe would still be universally accepted, women couldn't vote and black people would still be slaves.
Get your religion away from my rights!— PotteryPete 
Comment removed.- This is a political maneuver, to provide an additional incentive for hard line conservatives to go out and vote in November, when they may be dis-inclined to bother to vote for Romney..........Only designed to drive up conservative turn-out.— willll
- Christie just doesn't have a clue about the way the Constitution works: you don't put fundamental rights up for a popular vote. All the knee-jerk personal reactions on here are irrelevant except that they just point out why a democracy only works when it has a system for having some things you have to protect from the momentary madness of the majority.— mmaglich
- The #1 issue for the NJ Legislature is.....gay marriage?? To me, that is the real issue, not whether Christie should put it up for a vote by the people. I guess unemployment rates, and NJ's very high taxes(school reform, anyone?)are not important at all. I support teachers as much as anyone, but everyone I know who lives in North or South Jersey talks about the tax system, and how it needs to be fixed. Guess the NJ legislature doesn't really want to deal with real problems.— 76erfn
- slanted and enchanted: The black gay guy he nominated is a Republican. He's got to be the most self hating person on the planet.
A black gay Republican. Think about that. That's a lot of self hate.— Bush Destroyed America - I told you yesterday he would veto the gay marriage bill. When is the last time Matt Katz was critical of this Governor?— richw38
- @76erfn: AGREE 100% with you. Unfortunate that only you and I are the only voices of sanity amongst these posters. The thieves in Trenton are satisfied with the status quo of highest property taxes in the nation while they dilly dally with non-issues like overturning the death penalty or this latest issue: gay marriage.
As long as the brain dead dope electorate keep voting these fools in, we are all doomed. The thieves in Trenton are smart; by touching live wire topics like the death penalty and gay marriage the KNOW the dope public will ignore the fact that they are getting robbed with our out of control taxes and loss of good blue collar jobs.......— DelawareRiverRat - "It's hundreds of years of tradition, both legally, societally and religiously. And that's what I'm standing up for." A public figure has no place bringing religion (his or the "people's") into politics. Please refer to the first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." To suggest he is standing up for what certain religions suggest in the name of imposing certain laws on certain sets of people, tramples the very principles our country was founded on.— toph314
- Kind of a cowardly hedge - Christie will veto any gay marriage bill but suggests it should be put up for a general vote so he can absolve himself from the issue if it passes. This is a move strictly made in mind with a future national presidential run.— PhillyGuy77
- Governor Porkchop with the cowardly punt. What do we expect from the man who considered george Bush a "good" President? lol— The Fundamentals of the Economy are Fine
- why just gays. why not brothers and sisters too. it's their choice. there hasn't been gay marriage for a million years. there's a reason for that.— bobbyd24
- I believe that Christies is right when he says let the people decide------BUT if it's defeated, NO judge of any sort should interfere withthe will of the people unlike Californication.— crystalrainbowspirit1
- Marriage is a contract. When Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh and Ronald Reagan dissolved their marriages, they went to a lawyer. The government should not be telling consenting adults that they are not permitted to enter a contract unless there is a really good, legally justified reason (sorry but squeamishness and religious superstition do not count). Also, a person's rights and liberties should never be subjected to a popular vote; that scenario is rife with the potential for mob rule and the "tyranny of the majority."— mick-of-the-moment
- First, we determine it is a "civil rights" issue- then we argue that you can't relegate civil rights issues to popular vote. Gay marriage is no more a civil rights issue than the choice of my favorite sports team is. You are free to love and sleep with whomever you wish; but the institution of marriage is reserved for (one each) an adult man and woman.— tooly
- Comment removed.
- bobbyd24- What's the reason? How can you make that comment and then stop short of actually backing up your argument? If there's a clear cut reason, state it.— toph314
- @tooly--Marriage is a contract, not an institution. You go to the government/court to get a marriage license; you go to court to get a divorce. Are you saying that only some adults are permitted access to the courts?— mick-of-the-moment
- So's a pilot's licence - so because I don't have the same privilege as a pilot does not mean my civil rights have been abridged. The government has and exercises every day what parties have the right to enter into civil contracts. — tooly
- @tooly--Marriage is a contract, not an institution. You go to the government/court to get a marriage license; you go to court to get a divorce. Are you saying that only some adults are permitted access to the courts?— mick-of-the-moment
- mick: go try to argue a case before the State Supreme Court, you can't (for this analogy, I am assuming you are not a member of the bar). Go try to captain a cruise ship, go try to practice architecture, all are licenses (contracts) regulated by the government. To be clear, I SUPPORT civil unions, the quandary is created by the modern definition of marriage being both a secular contract and a religious contract. All i am saying is it is NOT a civil rights issue.
— tooly - mick: go try to argue a case before the State Supreme Court, you can't (for this analogy, I am assuming you are not a member of the bar). Go try to captain a cruise ship, go try to practice architecture, all are licenses (contracts) regulated by the government. To be clear, I SUPPORT civil unions, the quandary is created by the modern definition of marriage being both a secular contract and a religious contract. All i am saying is it is NOT a civil rights issue. (HTML deleted) — tooly
- FAIL!— chasing history
- Where is the Republican right? How dare this "liberal" governor jeopardize our moral values! He's a communist trying to destroy the country. Still waiting for the hypocrites. Guess no "real" Republicans around. Is Fox News going to lambaste the Golden Boy?— DennyP
- Comment removed.
- I am happy Christie did this. He knows if he signs a gay marriage bill his career in the Republican Party is over. He could have simply blocked the measure but he knows marriage equality is the right thing to do so he wants it on the ballot because it will definitely pass. He is trying to get the right end result without destroying his career. It would be nice if it didn't have to be so political but such is life.— dscol
- Comment removed.
- If Christie wants it on the ballot, the only valid question is: "Should same-sex marriage, barren couple-marriage, senior citizen marriage, adoptive parent marriage, childless-by choice marriage, divorce and adultery ALL be outlawed in the State of NJ?"
— Herbert2 - Christie just made the most cowardly political punt of his career and it’s going to hurt him bug time. How can he make that ridiculous, baseless statement the day after appointing a gay mad to the State Supreme Court, basically calling his appointment a 2nd class citizen. Either Christie has already brokered a deal to not veto (since the NJ Legislature probably can get a veto-proof coalition), or his advisers on this matter have failed him miserably. The record shows that those who are trying to buck the national momentum for marriage equality have all paid the price politically with the voters ousting the opposition in nearly every instance where the majority or near majority support marriage equality. NJ citizens (long history of gay equality support from back in the 90’s) have already polled in the majority more than several times in favor of marriage equality. We already knew that Christie was more bombast than intellect, but this foolish stance clearly validates that opinion.— Herbert2
- If you're premise is true than you should invite the Christie proposal as political suicide. He either looses through a veto proof majority OR he looses on a election referendum. Either way he "gets it in the end" (snicker, snicker)
— tooly - Why do gays want to be married?What can't they do now?The tax advantages aren't that great:You can generally borrow money much cheaper.— bigeastbeast
- So why don't you use "straights" instead of "gays?" What they can't do is make decisions for their partners when they are ill because a family member can supercede. Nor can't they inherit when their companion dies, like straights who are married. They can't pass property to their companions without being taxed. Anything else you'd like to ask? BTW, if Christie's openly gay nominee to the Supreme Court is okayed, will he have to recuse himself if the gay marriage question comes before the court? — mike l
- I agree with Christie. Put it up for vote and let the chips fall where they may.— MilesLong1
- The Fat Man is right...put it on a statewide ballot and let the results (and law) fall where it may. Corbett should do the same thing.— kelprod2
- This is right out of the Karl Rove & Co. playbook that helped elect W. Put a hot-button social issue on the ballot to bring out the ultra-conservatives to the polls who will, more likely, vote Republican. This is a transparent (if you think about it) dirty trick that is not relevant to New Jersey or the 2012 election.— ProPublicEducation
- Comment removed.
- It sounds very democratic to say let the people vote on it. However, what the people do or do not vote yes for isn't always legal. It wasn't too long ago that people in many states would have had no trouble voting for a segregated society. Would that make it okay if the people in a state voted for segregation?— mindstorms
- Comment removed.
- Glee starts at 8pm on Fox, then watch the supporters disappear.— tooly
- @tooly--Apparently you do not understand the difference between a professional license and a marriage license. But this does not surprise me. Repubs. or so called conservatives rarely can handle anything other than basic vocabulary words and find Glen Beck's take on the Constitution stimulating.— mick-of-the-moment
- Firstly, I am not a Republican, secondly I was replying to the issue of marriage (gay or otherwise) NOT being a civil right. There may be many reasons to support gay marriage, I have come out and said I support civil unions BUT the civil rights argument holds no water with me. I do not intend to be hurtful or hateful (and i am sorry if you took it that way) I am sharing my perspective. — tooly
- Christie nominates an openly gay man to the NJ Supreme Court, but yet he would deny that justice the right to marry his beloved companion, who accompanied him to the Christie announcement. Now if that is not the height of hypocrisy, I don't know what is.— mike l
- How about you vote on it since that's what you're paid to do. If the NJ voters have to decide everything themselves then why have a legislature?— meteo30
- Real patriot there. Could definitely see His Blimpness calling for a referendum on slavery circa 1860. Hey King Largeness, how about pushing for what is RIGHT? If you're not going to have the guts to take a stand on gay marriage, have some b*lls and ask for a ban on divorce, since, Your Fatness, it's all about the "sanctity of marriage" to amerika's kristian taliban....— enabler1
- The NJ Supreme Court and now the legislature have both already decided that marriage equality is a right in NJ. Guess Christie thinks that they're both wrong— Valley Twin
- we need to stop this abomination - it is depraved behavior, has been condemned by every society and religion down through the ages. It has never, never, anywhere been considered for marriage. In the few instances where this behavior was accepted by society, it represented the final stage of moral depravity and caused the collapse of that society. It will be the same here; this is the next step in the so-called sexual revolution.
They were not satisfied with the repeal of sodomy laws, were not satisfied with the creation of 'civil unions' and will not be satisfied with civil marriages.
Right now the left (Obama's white house) is proposing forcing Catholic hospitals to dispense contraception and catholic employers have to have contraception and abortion covered in their health care plans.
This is just the beginning of the state persecution of the church - they will come after the church over its refusal to perform gay marriage - this is an easy forecast. We better wake up!— joelombardo - Like California's Prposition 8, the gay activist movement will find another judge like Vaughn R. Walker to challenge the voice of the majority.— lefty
- Christie is the kind of Republican I knew and respected before the party was taken over by the crazies. What a better country we would have if both sides of the aisle were populated by persons such as Christie who think for what's best for the country as a whole instead of imposing ideology. Even after the horrors of the last Bush administration, I don;t think it would be a bad thing for Christie to win the presidency. I hope he hires a personal trainer who sees that his health does not deteriorate. We need him around for a long time.— prenestino
1
Popular Posts
About this blog
Reporter Matt Katz covers New Jersey's 55th governor, Chris Christie,
for the Philadelphia Inquirer.
Reach him at mkatz@phillynews.com or 609-217-8355.
Matt Katz
Inquirer Staff Writer
Reach him at mkatz@phillynews.com or 609-217-8355.
Follow Matt on Twitter: @mattkatz00. Reach Matt at mkatz@phillynews.com or 609-217-8355.
Search this blog:
Blog Roll
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: