|
Chris Christie Vetos Gay Marriage Bill; Should it be left up to a vote of the people?
|
|
Topic Started: Feb 19 2012, 01:12 AM (1,595 Views)
|
|
tomdrobin
|
Feb 19 2012, 01:12 AM
Post #1
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 19,566
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #14
- Joined:
- Feb 23, 2008
|
- Quote:
-
TRENTON, N.J. — Gov. Chris Christie has followed through on his promise to reject a bill allowing same-sex marriage in New Jersey by quickly vetoing the measure Friday and renewing his call for a ballot question to decide the issue.
The veto came a day after the state Assembly passed the bill. The state Senate had passed it on Monday. Christie, a Republican who opposes same-sex marriage, had vowed "very swift action" once the measure reached his desk.
In returning the bill to the Legislature, Christie reaffirmed his view that voters should decide whether to change the definition of marriage in New Jersey. His veto also proposed creating an ombudsman to oversee compliance with the state's civil union law, which same-sex couples have said is flawed and promotes discrimination.
"I am adhering to what I've said since this bill was first introduced – an issue of this magnitude and importance, which requires a constitutional amendment, should be left to the people of New Jersey to decide," Christie said in a statement. "I continue to encourage the Legislature to trust the people of New Jersey and seek their input by allowing our citizens to vote on a question that represents a profoundly significant societal change. This is the only path to amend our State Constitution and the best way to resolve the issue of same-sex marriage in our state.
"I have been just as adamant that same-sex couples in a civil union deserve the very same rights and benefits enjoyed by married couples – as well as the strict enforcement of those rights and benefits," the statement continued. "Discrimination should not be tolerated and any complaint alleging a violation of a citizen's right should be investigated and, if appropriate, remedied. To that end, I include in my conditional veto the creation of a strong Ombudsman for Civil Unions to carry on New Jersey's strong tradition of tolerance and fairness."
Democrats who had pushed the bill forward said they were disappointed, but not surprised, by Christie's action.
"It's unfortunate that the governor would let his own personal ideology infringe on the rights of thousands of New Jerseyans," said Reed Gusciora, one of two openly gay New Jersey lawmakers and a sponsor of the bill. "For all those who oppose marriage equality, their lives would have been completely unchanged by this bill, but for same-sex couples, their lives would have been radically transformed. Unfortunately, the governor couldn't see past his own personal ambitions to honor this truth."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/17/new-jersey-gay-marriage-b_0_n_1284641.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl3%7Csec3_lnk2%26pLid%3D136726
|
|
|
| |
|
Brewster
|
Feb 19 2012, 01:15 AM
Post #2
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 32,223
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #105
- Joined:
- Jul 16, 2008
|
It's amazing that the party that boasts that they are the defenders of personal freedom is also the party that wants to interfere in personal lives the most, on this topic and abortion, among others.
|
|
|
| |
|
Mountainrivers
|
Feb 19 2012, 01:18 AM
Post #3
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- tomdrobin
- Feb 19 2012, 01:12 AM
- Quote:
-
TRENTON, N.J. — Gov. Chris Christie has followed through on his promise to reject a bill allowing same-sex marriage in New Jersey by quickly vetoing the measure Friday and renewing his call for a ballot question to decide the issue.
The veto came a day after the state Assembly passed the bill. The state Senate had passed it on Monday. Christie, a Republican who opposes same-sex marriage, had vowed "very swift action" once the measure reached his desk.
In returning the bill to the Legislature, Christie reaffirmed his view that voters should decide whether to change the definition of marriage in New Jersey. His veto also proposed creating an ombudsman to oversee compliance with the state's civil union law, which same-sex couples have said is flawed and promotes discrimination.
"I am adhering to what I've said since this bill was first introduced – an issue of this magnitude and importance, which requires a constitutional amendment, should be left to the people of New Jersey to decide," Christie said in a statement. "I continue to encourage the Legislature to trust the people of New Jersey and seek their input by allowing our citizens to vote on a question that represents a profoundly significant societal change. This is the only path to amend our State Constitution and the best way to resolve the issue of same-sex marriage in our state.
"I have been just as adamant that same-sex couples in a civil union deserve the very same rights and benefits enjoyed by married couples – as well as the strict enforcement of those rights and benefits," the statement continued. "Discrimination should not be tolerated and any complaint alleging a violation of a citizen's right should be investigated and, if appropriate, remedied. To that end, I include in my conditional veto the creation of a strong Ombudsman for Civil Unions to carry on New Jersey's strong tradition of tolerance and fairness."
Democrats who had pushed the bill forward said they were disappointed, but not surprised, by Christie's action.
"It's unfortunate that the governor would let his own personal ideology infringe on the rights of thousands of New Jerseyans," said Reed Gusciora, one of two openly gay New Jersey lawmakers and a sponsor of the bill. "For all those who oppose marriage equality, their lives would have been completely unchanged by this bill, but for same-sex couples, their lives would have been radically transformed. Unfortunately, the governor couldn't see past his own personal ambitions to honor this truth." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/17/new-jersey-gay-marriage-b_0_n_1284641.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl3%7Csec3_lnk2%26pLid%3D136726 No, discrimination should be illegal no matter how many people think otherwise. We should not decide the rights of minorities by ballot. That's the job of the Constitution and the courts.
|
|
|
| |
|
Thumper
|
Feb 19 2012, 01:21 AM
Post #4
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 29,881
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #77
- Joined:
- Jun 10, 2008
|
Maybe Christie is a closet Libertarian?
|
|
|
| |
|
Mountainrivers
|
Feb 19 2012, 01:31 AM
Post #5
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- Thumper
- Feb 19 2012, 01:21 AM
Maybe Christie is a closet Libertarian? Nah! He's a big-mouthed, fat-ass know-it-all.
|
|
|
| |
|
Jim Miller
|
Feb 19 2012, 01:36 AM
Post #6
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 45,554
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #7
- Joined:
- Feb 19, 2008
|
- Brewster
- Feb 19 2012, 01:15 AM
It's amazing that the party that boasts that they are the defenders of personal freedom is also the party that wants to interfere in personal lives the most, on this topic and abortion, among others. Your opinion means nothing, Brew. Butt out.
|
|
|
| |
|
tomdrobin
|
Feb 19 2012, 01:36 AM
Post #7
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 19,566
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #14
- Joined:
- Feb 23, 2008
|
I think you hit the nail on the head Neal.
When your party's stock and trade is playing on peoples fears and biases then you have to include the evangilicals too. The evangilicals are well positioned for that sort of manipulation as they are used to using non fact based reasoning.
|
|
|
| |
|
Banandangees
|
Feb 19 2012, 03:47 AM
Post #8
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 20,839
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #23
- Joined:
- Mar 14, 2008
|
- Mountainrivers
- Feb 19 2012, 01:31 AM
- Thumper
- Feb 19 2012, 01:21 AM
Maybe Christie is a closet Libertarian?
Nah! He's a big-mouthed, fat-ass know-it-all. Ah yes!! I see you folks must hate heavy Italian people. How petty.
|
|
|
| |
|
campingken
|
Feb 19 2012, 04:04 AM
Post #9
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 11,506
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #31
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2008
|
Ban,
I don't hate Christie but I do believe that fat people don't have enough self discipline and, to me, this is a necessary trait for a leader.
|
|
|
| |
|
Tim from AL
|
Feb 19 2012, 04:22 AM
Post #10
|
- Posts:
- 3,595
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #82
- Joined:
- Jun 21, 2008
|
- campingken
- Feb 19 2012, 04:04 AM
(edit to point out main objective)I do believe that fat people don't have enough self discipline(edit) Hey. I am fat. I have plenty of self discipline. I just have large bones and a disease according to them called Huge Fat Butt Syndrome....LOL
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|