.

VIDEO: Gov. Says Same Sex Marriage Should Be on Ballot

Christie announces Tuesday he is urging for the question to be part of November elections.

Following a town hall meeting at the in Bridgewater Tuesday, Gov. Chris Christie announced he plans to urge Republicans in the legislature to vote to put the issue of same sex marriage on the ballot for November.

If not, and it is put on his desk, Christie said he will veto it.

"I've been consistent in my position," he said. "It is clear to me that marriage is between one man and one woman."

"But let's stop treating this like a political football, and let the rest of New Jersey decide," he added. "This is an opportunity to take away any political maneuvering because the institution of marriage is too serious."

Christie said he does not believe the issue of same sex marriage is a political one, but he would not hesitate to follow through on his original campaign promise that he would veto any bill to legalize it in the state.

But, Christie said, he also would not hesitate to follow the will of the people of New Jersey if they voted for the bill.

"This is too big a change to be decided in the halls of Trenton," he said, adding that he does not see this as just a way to pawn off the decision on to the voters. "We need to be governed by the will of the people, and the best expression of that is through an election."

"I am suggesting there is another way to do this," he added.

Christie said the state would require a three-fifths vote in the legislature to put the question on the ballot, and he urges all Republican legislators to vote to bring it to the elections. This year will bring the most voters out because of the presidential election, so it is the perfect time to put the issue of same sex marriage on the ballot, Christie said.

"And then we can move on to other issues for the people," he said.

Once the legislation announced that the same sex marriage issue was a priority this year, Christie said, he knew they were on a "collision course."

"So this is an attempt by me to be nonpartisan," he said. "I think the way to do that is put the issue on the ballot. And that will empower the result even more."

Denobin January 27, 2012 at 04:26 PM
John, Please find a rational, non-right leaning religious source to back up your nonsense.
Denobin January 27, 2012 at 04:34 PM
Oh Max, how I would love to agree with you on something someday. A CU is not legally equivalent to marriage: that is the argument. If it was, this argument would not exist. The definition of marriage has nothing to do with granting gays the same rights as other citizens, it is being used as an excuse to discriminate. Again, tell me,what harm would be done?
Maxim Sapozhnikov January 27, 2012 at 04:38 PM
Denobin, Which legal rights, besides getting a cute piece of paper, do gays lack in a civil union? Name a few please. As for harm, I have already answered that question at least twice.
Denobin January 27, 2012 at 04:39 PM
John, Really? If you believe that then you must support and float this law: Anyone couple not intending to pro-create cannot legally be married, no matter the reason. Then you can stand by your argument. Until then, it is a poor excuse for your senseless bias. Please do everyone a favor and just admit that you have no ration reason to be opposed to gay marriage; you just don't like it. And not liking it is not a reason to deny anyone their civil rights.
Maxim Sapozhnikov January 27, 2012 at 04:44 PM
Denobin, it's so good of you to remind me. Who told you that the right to marry is a civil right? I couldn't find it anywhere in the Constitution of the United States, nor in that of New Jersey.
Denobin January 27, 2012 at 04:46 PM
Tom: Why don't you take your own advice leave an issue alone that has absolutely no bearing in your existence, besides the fact that it makes you uncomfortable? Amazing that you are so in touch with the gay community that you can read their minds and have such a clear perspective on their agenda. Your attitude clearly reflects your bias, bias that I can only guess is based on fear and superstition in light of the lack of any rational argument to the contrary.
Denobin January 27, 2012 at 04:51 PM
The prevailing attitude of those who oppose gay marriage seems to be "I can't articulate with any certainty why it's bad, I just feel it is." That is exactly why questions like this do not belong on a referendum.
Hookerman January 27, 2012 at 05:04 PM
And it's better to shuttle them from one foster home to another, with absolutely no stability whatsoever? That's a far bigger gamble than putting them with a dedicated and loving gay couple. Ask any expert.
Thomas Lotito January 27, 2012 at 05:10 PM
Denobin thanks for making my point when I wrote:.."Really the issue is not about marriage, it's about homosexuals deep rooted need to be accepted by society. So they attack those that disagree with their agenda. " In reality you're an intolerant bigot, who can not stomach an alternative point of view even in a debate with out attacking....can't wait until this goes to a public vote, you'll probably come down with a case of turret's syndrome....
Hookerman January 27, 2012 at 05:10 PM
It CANNOT happen as long as the constitution is observed! Once the constitution is ignored, then the whole country is dead anyway and none of this matters!
Maxim Sapozhnikov January 27, 2012 at 05:24 PM
>> The prevailing attitude of those who oppose gay marriage seems to >> be "I can't articulate with any certainty why it's bad, I just feel it is." That >> is exactly why questions like this do not belong on a referendum. That is, of course, a blatant and pointless lie. I've given you the arguments, you just preferred to ignore them. And this stubborn inability to listen to the other side is precisely why you'll lose this referendum.
Maxim Sapozhnikov January 27, 2012 at 05:30 PM
I'll grant you that; foster care is even worse than a gay family can ever be. I would be willing to grant gay families the adoption right in two cases: when biological parents are personally agreeing to it (unless deprived of parental rights by social services), or when no "regular" family is willing to adopt. I see it as an application of "lesser damage" principle, not the matter of inequality.
Maxim Sapozhnikov January 27, 2012 at 05:34 PM
>> It CANNOT happen as long as the constitution is observed! Once the >> constitution is ignored, then the whole country is dead anyway and >> none of this matters! The Constitution is already ignored. Between SOPA, Patriot Act, TSA gropefest, draconian gun restrictions, ObamaCare, and other legislative manure both parties are generously showering us with, what's left of it?
Hookerman January 27, 2012 at 06:28 PM
Ok Max, well if even you concede that there are situations where it makes sense to place children in the care of same-sex couples, then there is the argument for same-sex marriage. Often these kids who gay couples adopt are the ones that 'regular families' (as you call them) don't want... ie; disabled kids and non-Asian minorities. Don't they deserve the same legal protection as all other kids???
Maxim Sapozhnikov January 27, 2012 at 06:36 PM
>> Ok Max, well if even you concede... _Even_ me? I'm a sworn agnostic; even though I see religion as part of human tradition, I couldn't care less for Adam & Eve fairytale. You have a much tougher folk to convince in a statewide debate. >> ...disabled kids and non-Asian minorities. Don't they deserve the same >> legal protection as all other kids??? They definitely do, but you cannot force people to adopt children they don't like; even North Korea didn't go _that_ far. If gays were willing to step in, they'd earn much more goodwill with the "regular" (I prefer this word to "normal") society than by waving rainbow flags in meetings and demanding special rights.
Hookerman January 27, 2012 at 06:50 PM
That's exactly what I'm saying! Gay couples have stepped in and adopt kids that no one else wants. In fact, I know a gay woman at work who's adopted two special needs kids with her partner.
Maxim Sapozhnikov January 27, 2012 at 07:00 PM
If there were no other families willing to adopt, that coworker lady of yours is a better argument for gay marriage than anything said so far on this forum.
lexih January 27, 2012 at 07:58 PM
Christie had mentioned: "This is too big a change to be decided in the halls of Trenton," but as far as I know, GLBT individuals seeking marriage are a minority in New Jersey. Changing the current laws regarding marriage will only affect this said, small minority; how is this too big an issue to be decided in Trenton? Oh wait, that's right. Gay marriage hurts heterosexual marriage/the institution of the family, just like schoolyard integration hurts the education of whites and the end of slavery hurt the sanctity of whites in the South. Ridiculous. Also, if Chris Christie really thought that gay marriage isn't a political issue, why would he veto the bill? To fall in line with party politics, obviously. Sell-out. Finally, as far as Max's point that gay marriage is bad for children, the only issue I've ever seen children of a gay couple coping with is unnecessary teasing and feelings of shame related to the taunting of other children brought up in our ignorant, close-minded and unaccepting society. If you actually look at social research and empirical data instead of your gut reaction, you will find much of the same.
Maxim Sapozhnikov January 27, 2012 at 08:08 PM
Lexi, I can be a very agreeable person when presented with facts. These days, the government doesn't dig a ditch without an extensive environmental research, and we have some children futures at stake. Can you point me to any studies comparing successful family life (measured by marriage duration, divorce rate, career achievements, etc.) of children adopted by gay families opposite other adoptions or general population? Until such research is performed, count me a skeptic.
Brady January 27, 2012 at 08:24 PM
Max, over 80 studies have been done. Here is a quote for you though, "[The research] pretty much shows that almost no study that has been done on this topic has confirmed this common sense assumption that gender is critical or that a father-mother household works better for kids than a same-sex household," said Brian Powell, a sociologist at Indiana University,
Maxim Sapozhnikov January 27, 2012 at 08:44 PM
Brady, I'm a statistical analyst. I'll take numbers over words any day. I assume the article from which you quoted had links; I'd like to see them.
Brady January 27, 2012 at 09:07 PM
Max, if you cared to find them I am sure you know how to search. Don't blame me for a lack of knowledge if you don't seek it.
Maxim Sapozhnikov January 27, 2012 at 09:17 PM
Let me guess, Brady: you don't have any, don't care to admit it, and want to spin it into an insult. Right?
Brady January 27, 2012 at 09:58 PM
Max, spin this how ever you want. I know how to do research and do it when it matters to me. Educating you is not that important to me right now. Have a good weekend.
Richard E. Templin May 29, 2012 at 01:00 PM
Bailey is an expert on Civil Rights. Here he is getting busted for violating them. http://cloverhillswimclub.blogspot.com/ Bailey should acknowledge his "alternative" lifestyle as he volunteered in his comments on this Chatham Patch article. http://chatham.patch.com/articles/committee-passes-market-garden-ordinance
Frank L June 08, 2012 at 04:19 AM
More comments on a workday, get back to work Tom the Patch isnt the one paying you...
Frank L June 08, 2012 at 04:22 AM
Wow you spend a lot of energy on this site during the time you are being paid by the company you work for...
Frank L June 08, 2012 at 04:22 AM
Well thought out post during the work day, get back to work TOm
Frank L June 08, 2012 at 04:23 AM
So it looks like the entire 1-2 hour was a waste, how much do you owe our company for this time "off"
Frank L June 08, 2012 at 04:24 AM
Finally some blah blah on your own time, not mine

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »