Gov. Christie Defends Plan To Put Same-Sex Marriage To NJ Voters

By John Ostapkovich

TRENTON, N.J. (CBS) — New Jersey governor Chris Christie is sticking to his guns on the issue of same-sex marriage, but wonders why its proponents are sticking to theirs.

During a capitol news conference today to announce two new cabinet appointments, the governor was asked repeatedly about the same-sex marriage bill being fast-tracked toward his promised veto.

He says the rejection of his suggestion of a Constitutional referendum puzzles him:

“I don’t know why they’ve ruled it out — doesn’t make any sense to be — because they know what’s going to happen here, which makes you think the only reason they’re doing this is politics, because if they really cared about the issue and they know the way this is going to end, then why don’t they give same-sex couples in New Jersey the opportunity to make their case to the public?  I don’t know.”

Christie says comparisons of him to notorious segregationist governors is wrong because they’d never have allowed a civil rights referendum.

Top Content On CBSPhilly

More from John Ostapkovich
  • Roman Doroshenko

    Gay marriage is not a civil right, it’s a perversion of the sanctity of marriage. Let them have civil unions. This isn’t slavery or the right to vote, so what that its 2012, doesn’t mean that every decade we must accept some b.s. because we are moving on. Morals and values are deteriorating.

    • Another Jean

      “The sanctity of marriage” is a religious take on what is really a legal institution. Remember that marriage licenses are issued by the states, not by churches or synagogues. Marriage began as a method of protecting inheritances, and religion became involved later. A marriage at its root is a legal contract.

  • TheTrueOne

    The civil rights or a minority should never be subject to popular vote. If that were the case, slavery would be the law of the land, woman would not be allowed to vote or own property, and forget any freedom of religion.
    Christie is a flash in the pan populist pig who caters to bigotry and ignorance.

  • TheTrueOne

    The civil rights of a minority should never be subject to popular vote. If that were the case, slavery would never have been abolished, segregation would be the law of most states and and women would never have the right to vote let alone own property.

  • Another Jean

    Whether or not segregationists would have allowed a referendum is not the point. The point is that civil / equal rights are not just some favor to be granted to outsiders if the insiders happen to feel like it. That notion is why it took all the way until 1920 for women to gain the right to vote. Civil rights are supposed to be applied to everyone, equally. That seems pretty simple.

  • Karen

    Let the people of NJ vote and decide if they are for or against it! As usual Politicians be Politicians!

  • Linda D Bryant

    Christie is a fat POS. Thank God he was not around in the 60’s when the
    Voting Rights and other Civil Rights Acts had to be enacted.

    He would have put that up for a State vote also!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

blog comments powered by Disqus
Taz Goes Big!
Download Now!

Listen Live