Christie Vetoes Gay Marriage

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2011
168,548
31,430
2,220
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Dumb, dumb dumb...

U.S. News - NJ Gov. Christie vetoes same-sex marriage bill

I've always been a critic of judges who decide they are going to disregard the will of legistlatures and the populace and impose these things, but here's a case where they did it the right way, they passed a bill, and Christie the Hutt decides he's stull sucking up to be RomBot's running mate.
 
"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,"

Seems like he wants the people to make the decision. And you have a problem with this?
 
"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,"

Seems like he wants the people to make the decision. And you have a problem with this?

Um, yeah, I usually do when people appeal to bigotry to advance their political careers.

Christy is a fat sack of shit.
 
Dumb, dumb dumb...

U.S. News - NJ Gov. Christie vetoes same-sex marriage bill

I've always been a critic of judges who decide they are going to disregard the will of legistlatures and the populace and impose these things, but here's a case where they did it the right way, they passed a bill, and Christie the Hutt decides he's stull sucking up to be RomBot's running mate.

Whats the big deal, as an elected Governor he exorcised his right to veto a bill he didn't like.

If people are really that bent out of shape about it, they'll vote him out next time.
 
Well, I don't agree that there is a constitutional "right" to gay marriage.

But I think that the crafting of laws should be left to the legistlature. That's their function. And unlike a referendum, they have the time and ability to craft laws.

The veto power of a governor or president should be reserved for instances when a legislature acts irresponsibly. Here, it hasn't.

Christy is just sucking up to a larger national stage. Because he knows his fat ass is probalby done in the Gubenertorial election of 2013.
 
Dumb, dumb dumb...

U.S. News - NJ Gov. Christie vetoes same-sex marriage bill

I've always been a critic of judges who decide they are going to disregard the will of legistlatures and the populace and impose these things, but here's a case where they did it the right way, they passed a bill, and Christie the Hutt decides he's stull sucking up to be RomBot's running mate.

Whats the big deal, as an elected Governor he exorcised his right to veto a bill he didn't like.

If people are really that bent out of shape about it, they'll vote him out next time.

Which they probably will. Which is why he's sucking up to the far right and hoping he ends up somewhere in a hypothetical Romney Administration.
 
Seriously I could give a fuck. The Governor is within his rights and he wants the people to vote on it. Sounds damned fair to me. But then since I'm not living in New Jersey it's not my problem. The people who live there will handle it the way they want to.
 
Well, I don't agree that there is a constitutional "right" to gay marriage.

But I think that the crafting of laws should be left to the legistlature. That's their function. And unlike a referendum, they have the time and ability to craft laws.

The veto power of a governor or president should be reserved for instances when a legislature acts irresponsibly. Here, it hasn't.

Christy is just sucking up to a larger national stage. Because he knows his fat ass is probalby done in the Gubenertorial election of 2013.

Translation: " I just hate republicans and everything they do."
 
I've always been a critic of judges who decide they are going to disregard the will of legistlatures and the populace and impose these things,
Actually judges have no choice but to strike down legislation which is clearly un-Constitutional, for a judge to do otherwise, he’d be disregarding the rule of law.

but here's a case where they did it the right way, they passed a bill, and Christie the Hutt decides he's stull sucking up to be RomBot's running mate.

True. It’s incumbent upon states to follow the Constitution, in this case the 14th Amendment right of equal access to the law. If states (or in this example a governor) fail to follow the rule of law, that’s where the needless lawsuits come from.

Seems like he wants the people to make the decision. And you have a problem with this?

In fact, the Constitution has a problem with it: civil rights aren’t determined by majority rule.
 
Christie is being set up on this one and the legislature called his bluff

It will make him a big shot with the GOP in 2012 but by 2016 if he were to run for president "Christie vetoed gay marriage" will be a millstone around his neck. By 2016 most Americans will have gay marriage available. Christies denial of marriage privleges to gays will alienate independents and his "I wanted to have the people vote on it" will ring hollow
 
"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,"

Seems like he wants the people to make the decision. And you have a problem with this?


pay attention to where CA is now. It was left to the voters and is now up for legal review.

Where this issue will be decided is in the high courts....as it should be.
 
Last edited:
Seriously I could give a fuck. The Governor is within his rights and he wants the people to vote on it. Sounds damned fair to me. But then since I'm not living in New Jersey it's not my problem. The people who live there will handle it the way they want to.

Yes

Voting on someone elses civil rights is always fair
 
Christie wants to be president, so he is hitching his wagon to the right wing.
 
Last edited:
Seriously I could give a fuck. The Governor is within his rights and he wants the people to vote on it. Sounds damned fair to me. But then since I'm not living in New Jersey it's not my problem. The people who live there will handle it the way they want to.

Yes

Voting on someone elses civil rights is always fair

Since the Supreme Court has not ruled on whether or not gay marriage is a civil right, Christie is within his rights to veto the bill and ask the people if they want to extend to homosexuals the privilege of cash and prizes for getting married.
 
Seriously I could give a fuck. The Governor is within his rights and he wants the people to vote on it. Sounds damned fair to me. But then since I'm not living in New Jersey it's not my problem. The people who live there will handle it the way they want to.

Yes

Voting on someone elses civil rights is always fair

Since the Supreme Court has not ruled on whether or not gay marriage is a civil right, Christie is within his rights to veto the bill and ask the people if they want to extend to homosexuals the privilege of cash and prizes for getting married.

Cash and prizes?

I thought it was because they loved each other
 
Yes

Voting on someone elses civil rights is always fair

Since the Supreme Court has not ruled on whether or not gay marriage is a civil right, Christie is within his rights to veto the bill and ask the people if they want to extend to homosexuals the privilege of cash and prizes for getting married.

Cash and prizes?

I thought it was because they loved each other

There is nothing stopping gays from marrying. Nothing. Christie did not just veto their ability to marry.

The only thing that separates a gay marriage from a straight marriage is the government cash and prizes that come with marriage. That is what Christie vetoed. And that is what makes gay marriage a 14th amendment issue.

See my signature.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top