Christie vetoes gay marriage bill

Discussion in 'The Thunderdome' started by JayVols, Feb 17, 2012.

  1. JayVols

    JayVols Walleye Catchin' Moderator

    I know there are many Christie admirers here. Does his decision change any opinions? Is this a net positive or negative for him?

    The only thing I know on the matter is how he tried to explain this situation like the Civil Rights Movement in the south. Full disclosure: I only heard some soundbites of his explanation, so I am not speaking from a complete picture- From what I heard intitially and how he tried to portray it later was pretty near irreconcilable to me.

    My personal opinion on the matter is that as the Constitution states, we all have inalienable rights. I know marriage is not sanctioned by the federal government. But, I am conflicted by allowing a popular vote on an issue of rights. If voters can bestow a right, they can take them away. If it doesn't bother you that gay marriage be open to popular vote, remember, the next time the issue may be important to you. Yet, a precedent has been set. Interested on your views.
  2. CardinalVol

    CardinalVol Uncultured, non-diverse mod

    Plain and simple - he wants to run for President and he knows darn well he'll never get the GOP nod if he signs this.

    My stance on gay marriage confuses myself, much less even trying to type it out on a keyboard to explain it.

    That said, it's a tremendous wedge issue used by both sides of the aisle so I don't see any "closure" to this anytime soon. It's been going on as long as I've followed politics and I don't see that changing.
  3. JayVols

    JayVols Walleye Catchin' Moderator

    CV, I understand your points. I just find it sad that rights are a political football. Especially from the folks that proclaim to be all about the Constitution.

    I know it's politics. I know it's a wedge issue, but what 2 people do in the privacy of their home is of no concern to me. Live and let live. I wouldn't characterize myself as pro-gay marriage per se. I do characterize myself as a pro nondiscriminatory person. This is today's mixed marriage debate all over again. Christie had a chance to make a difference today. He blew it. Mixed marriage opponents were fighting a losing battle. This issue is as much of a losing battle, too.
  4. hatvol96

    hatvol96 Well-Known Member

    If all levels of government would do what they should and quit acting as if they have any business sanctioning marriage, the US would be a better place.
  5. JayVols

    JayVols Walleye Catchin' Moderator

    I can agree with this.
  6. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    Hat has the reasonable solution. Get out of the marriage business.
  7. Unimane

    Unimane Kill "The Caucasian"

    It's a losing battle for the GOP. In 20 years, no one will give a shit that gay people get married the same way that people don't give a shit about interracial marriages anymore. I don't know why certain conservatives always want to make the last stand for changing morays on social issues, but this never works out in the long term.
  8. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    Further, I don't know why they make stands on issues by designating them as "moral" ones without forming a rational argument that doesn't involve imposing one's religious belief on others.
  9. dknash

    dknash Chieftain

    There's a difference between legal gay marriage and mandatory gay marriage. Not sure everyone in America understands this.
  10. JayVols

    JayVols Walleye Catchin' Moderator

    Please explain.
  11. volfanjo

    volfanjo Chieftain

    I think he is making a joke, i.e. just because it is legal doesn't mean you have to have one.
  12. dknash

    dknash Chieftain

    Pretty much. I understand but don't understand why there's any controversy at all. If there were no tax benefits and/or various things like medical rights, adoption rights, etc., then the anti-view would perhaps carry more weight. And people can disapprove of whatever they want. But marriage in America is as much of a governmental status as it is a religious one, and denying it to others is prejudice, plain and simple.

    Brings to mind a simple solution - get rid of joint filing. I'm sure all parties could agree on that, right?
  13. JayVols

    JayVols Walleye Catchin' Moderator

    My sarcasm meter must be malfunctioning. I was clueless.....
  14. Steve C.

    Steve C. Banned

    Marriage wasn't of the Christian stripe until they hijacked it in the Middle Ages, anyway. I once asked an ardently Christian person, "Why should you have the opportunity to benefit from tax breaks based on your sexual preference while others do not?" He deftly replied with, "life's not fair." I laughed and left.
  15. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    Sounds like a good retort if he ever complains about having to pay for someone's Welfare.
  16. justingroves

    justingroves supermod

    Because they're pandering pieces of shit that would rather strike a nerve than do something productive

Share This Page