Brian Brown | Chris Christie | Gay Marriage | New Jersey | News

NJ Governor Christie Announces He Wants Voters to Decide If Gay People Deserve Equal Rights: VIDEO


As I reported earlier, today New Jersey Governor Chris Christie called for a voter referendum on same-sex marriage and said he'll veto any marriage equality bill that comes to his desk. Christie's announcement comes even as a Quinnipiac poll this week revealed that a majority of New Jersey voters support marriage equality.

"Let's stop treating this like a political football and let the people of New Jersey decided," said Christie.

Watch video of Christie's announcement, AFTER THE JUMP...

BrownNOM's Brian Brown, of course, is thrilled:

"The people of New Jersey do not support same-sex marriage and if given the chance to vote on a constitutional amendment would vote to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman," Brown said. "Voters in every state to consider this question have decided that traditional marriage should be protected and have rejected same-sex marriage. This is why legislative backers of gay marriage in New Jersey have already rejected putting a traditional marriage constitutional amendment on the ballot—they know they will lose."

Watch Christie's announcement, AFTER THE JUMP...

Meanwhile, a Senate panel advanced the marriage equality bill after a hearing this morning:

The 8-4 vote along party lines is the first significant development in gay rights since December 2006 when the state enacted civil unions that gay rights activists have said fail to give same-sex couples the same rights as married heterosexual couples.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Well this is an extraordinarily dangerous proposal;
    the majority get to decide on whether we have specific rights !

    So I guess we are not endowed with unalienable rights after all.
    Now of what other rights would the majority like to deprive us ?

    Fu*k this !

    Posted by: JackFknTwist | Jan 24, 2012 6:56:59 PM

  2. Shorter version: let's get out the GOP vote!

    Posted by: BobN | Jan 24, 2012 7:05:15 PM

  3. Christie's brain-dead on this. You simply do not put anyone's civil rights up for a vote. I thought he was more courageous than that. And what are his reasons for opposing marriage equality? Are they similar to the same "rationale" that prevents him from going on a diet?

    Posted by: Jerry | Jan 24, 2012 7:06:42 PM

  4. I still can't believe we put this up to a vote... but what exactly will NOM's and other hate group's reaction be when a state finally votes FOR marriage equality. You know it's going to happen sooner or later and then what will they say? Will they finally admit the people have voted and leave it alone? (I'm definately guessing not!)

    Posted by: Randy | Jan 24, 2012 7:10:07 PM

  5. Once again, they don't get it. Just because you have the majority vote, it doesn't make it what this country was built on. They have every right to believe what they want to believe when it comes to religion. But we don't have to live to their religious beliefs. Some of us have a brain and decided what is the right thing to do without a made up book to guide us on how to be a good person.,

    Posted by: Jayson | Jan 24, 2012 7:11:57 PM

  6. I wnat voters to decided if Christie has the right to eat any more food.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jan 24, 2012 7:13:18 PM

  7. Christie has actually never said he'd veto a bill if it reached his desk. He's trying to deter the issue away from him so that he doesn't have to deal with it. Thankfully it doesn't seem that the NJ legislature will have it!

    Posted by: Stefan | Jan 24, 2012 7:14:09 PM

  8. I'm kinda torn on this. I actually (as a progressive) like Gov. Christie. He didn't come across as a typical GOP republican, in terms of decrying the ongoing moral decay posed by the nefarious homosexuals, and seemed to have a sense of humor (about his weight and about politics). I don't agree with him on policy, but he seemed like a personable guy.

    That's why I'm torn on this position. I see it as a political calculation. Gov. Christie certainly has 2016 on his mind and doesn't want to be saddled with the "Governor who signed into law same-sex marriage" label.

    I think (and I might be just pulling this out of my ass) that he might see putting this vote to the state as a way of allowing marriage equality to pass or fail without being blamed, when his time comes to run for President. He's learned a lesson from Romney who is being battered and bruised by his opponents, about what he signed into law...RomneyCare.

    In the end, this is a horrible move for civil rights. They should NEVER be put up to a vote, and the tyranny of the majority should be steadfastly beaten back in order to protect the minority.

    Posted by: Leonard | Jan 24, 2012 7:18:52 PM

  9. Doesn't anyone understand the meaning of "unalienable " ?

    OK, the correct word is "inalienable".......but let's not dump on the Founding Fathers.
    And yes, "equality" is/should be un/inalienable.

    Posted by: JackFknTwist | Jan 24, 2012 7:21:08 PM

  10. Anybody hear the hearing/vote? notice the republicans who voted no sounded ashamed? Seriously, they sounded like they knew they'd live to regret their votes because they'll look like bigots even to most republicans in 10 years .

    Posted by: Dw | Jan 24, 2012 7:22:51 PM

  11. Brian Brown said, "We believe that marriage, the foundational institution of society, should not be discarded under any circumstance."

    So when you expand civil rights to a minority, that will somehow completely destroy the institution of marriage for everyone else? Funny how that didn't happen when interracial marriage was forced on the country by the Supreme Court. -- Asshat!

    Posted by: David in Houston | Jan 24, 2012 7:38:36 PM

  12. He looks like something out of The Sopranos

    Posted by: DanSwon | Jan 24, 2012 8:00:40 PM

  13. Gee, New Jersey must be the richest state in the Union. Every other state is having fiscal problems but Christie thinks New Jersey should spend millions of dollars on a completely unnecessary election to let voters decide on gay civil rights. Smooth move, Gov Ex-Lax.

    Posted by: Jay | Jan 24, 2012 8:12:08 PM

  14. He's pandering for Romney.

    Posted by: M. Scott Hernandez | Jan 24, 2012 8:35:24 PM

  15. This sucks. The Quinnipiac poll may show over 50% of people support marriage, but as we have seen time and time again, when put up to a vote, we lose, because organisations like NOM will stoop to their lowest dirtiest tactics, pulling out those parents from MA who say their son is forced to learn about gay sex in kindergarten. It is not a fair vote with them in the room. But I will go back to NJ to help campaign for it.

    And BTW, NJ actually is the richest state in the union, in terms of per capita and median income (sorry, just had to point that out as a proud New Jerseyan ;-)

    Posted by: Mike C. | Jan 24, 2012 9:07:15 PM

  16. this is what happened in california

    very sad

    Posted by: h | Jan 24, 2012 10:59:49 PM

  17. I am morally against obese people eating at fast food restaurants. I believe that the bible states gluttony is a sin. Perhaps there should be a constitutional amendment banning obese people from consuming fast food.

    Posted by: Tony S | Jan 24, 2012 11:08:24 PM

  18. What a small man this huge politician is !

    Posted by: MarkBoston | Jan 24, 2012 11:55:08 PM

  19. That's mighty liberal of him.

    Posted by: It's just my opinion | Jan 24, 2012 11:56:55 PM

  20. Should morbidly obese people have to pay double for health insurance? Let's vote on it.

    Posted by: Ninong | Jan 25, 2012 12:52:09 AM

  21. oh sure, guv, let's let the people of NJ decide if gay taxpayers have about black taxpayers, gonna vote on their rights too?---think that's been done---how about fat, obese taxpayers, shall we take a vote there? -------you would be out of a job and out of town, chris---i thought the Constitution of the United States gave the same rights to all people, gay, black and even fat, although I might draw the line there: not pretty

    Posted by: dave gershner | Jan 25, 2012 4:02:59 AM

  22. The so-called "Tradition of Marriage" from the beginning of time....

    Moses had two wives. He wrote the five books of the Jewish Torah (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy) which are also part of Christian's Bible (Old Testament). He was married to Zipporah (a Midianite) and a Cushite (Ethopian) woman (set forth in Chapter 12 of the Book of Numbers).

    Abraham, Jacob, David and King Solomon each had multiple wives. These and other examples of prophets and men marrying multiple wives can be found throughout the Christian Bible.

    Jesus Christ, the Son of God, never married and said nothing about homosexuality. He did tell everyone, including his Christian followers, to "love one another" and "treat your neighbor as you would yourself."

    The Prophet Joseph Smith, founder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormonism) had at least six wives. Plural marriage was publicly practiced from 1852 to 1890 when it was terminated by the Manifesto issued by LDS Church President Woodruff.

    Allowing gay and lesbian couples access to civil marriage as recognized by the secular government of a U.S. State (like say, New Jersey) doesn't alter religious teachings or the definition of a religion's "traditional marriage" philosophy.

    Allowing gays and lesbian couples access to civil marriage DOES treat them the same as other couples under the equal protection clauses set forth in our state and federal constitutions.

    God has "handed down" his law(s) to the various religions and their followers.

    Legislatures were established to make the laws under which all citizens --believers or not-- must live.

    New Jersey should join New York and pass this bill, hopefully with veto-proof margins in both chambers.

    Posted by: TruthSeeker_Too | Jan 25, 2012 5:56:39 AM

  23. Dear Sad, Always The Bridesmaid Joisey: Thanks for too little, too late and good luck. You could have beat NY to the punch when Corzine was Governor, but you didn't have the balls. Now that all those NJ couples are crossing the river to come to NY to get married and spend that $$ over here, you have had a change of heart. Too bad. Maybe next time you'll elect a real Governor, like we have. Elections have consequences. Cuomo: Promise Kept. Joisey: Reputation earned.

    Posted by: ChrisQ | Jan 25, 2012 6:21:04 AM

  24. Brian Brown said, "We believe that marriage, the foundational institution of society, should not be discarded under any circumstance."

    And two days ago, he and NOM were celebrating serial adulterer Newt Gingrich.

    Which from now on should be brought up every single time anyone from NOM rears their ugly head, as it confirms (if there's anyone who ever doubted) how absolutely full of sh*t is that NOM actually feels anything about the "morality" of marriage other than greedily trying to make money off it.

    Posted by: bobbyjoe | Jan 25, 2012 7:46:16 AM

  25. This is to provide cover for Republicans in the assembly so they don't have to vote in favor of the newly proposed law, but only the referendum. This protects Christie's veto. However, the issue is also in the courts and Christie just nominated a gay guy, so the whole thing will probably be decided in the state supreme court.

    Posted by: anon | Jan 25, 2012 9:29:37 AM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley, LGBT Advocates Introduce Marriage Equality Bill: VIDEO« «