Christie Reagan

Christie: Cold, Calculated Coward

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is no shrinking violet. He’s a man who stands up boldly, bellows his opinions loudly and proudly, and smacks down his opponents with animated, smirking gusto.

That’s why his decision to veto the historic marriage equality bill passed this week is, pardon my French New Jersey, absolute bullshit. It’s cowardly. It’s political. It’s very un-Christie.

A funny thing happened on the way to the number of states that allow same-sex marriage inching even closer to the number of states that allow you to marry your cousin. The N.J. Senate approved a marriage equality bill on Monday, finding the votes it needed after legislation failed two years ago. The N.J. Assembly on Thursday passed A-1 by a 42-33 count, which means the bill is law if Christie affixes his signature to it. Only the governor, admired by many progressives, acted on his promise of a “swift” veto.

Here’s Christie’s half-baked thought process on the veto: Any vote on same-sex marriage ultimately belongs to the residents of New Jersey, not the 120 lawmakers and the governor.

But passing such legislation is the very job of the state’s representatives. Using Christie’s ill logic, why stop at marriage equality — shouldn’t all laws derive from a popular vote then? If the New Jersey Legislature cannot be trusted to vote on this issue, what good are they? Why are they even living and voting in Trenton? And, the most important rhetorical question here, if ANY legislation should be in the hands of lawmakers and not the people, shouldn’t it be a law that explicitly protects the rights of a minority against the fickle will of the majority?

After all, we just saw this play out over the last three years in California. The people voted to overturn marriage equality, only for one appeals court to strike down the popular vote and a panel of another higher court to rule thusly: “We consider whether that amendment violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. We conclude that it does. … Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples.”

Interracial marriage and same-sex marriage aren’t exactly the same thing, but the former does offer a good parallel for Christie on the latter. When the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in 1967′s Loving v. Virginia, which made it illegal to put race-based restrictions on marriage, nearly three of every four Americans disapproved of the mixing of the races. Forty-five years later, those numbers are reversed: Now 86 percent approve of interracial marriage. If every governor at the time left interracial marriage to the will of a popular vote, we’d still be waiting for some states to come around.

Christie, instead, proudly professes his ignorance: “The fact of the matter is, I think people would have been happy to have a referendum on civil rights rather than fighting and dying in the streets in the South,” he said in late January. Because everyone would’ve enjoyed having their rights put to a vote.

The governor’s position is cold, calculated and bogus. There’s no Christie Straight Talk™ here. His entire decision-making process is wrapped up in a presidential run for 2016. Where’s the guy who called out the “crazies” in his own party that were shrieking about Sharia law becoming reality in the United States? Where’s that dude? Sure it’s a different issue, but it’s similar in the context that people on the wrong side of this issue are mired in myths. Has the sky fallen in New York, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington, D.C.? Is the sky about to fall in Washington state? No. It’s “crazy” to think otherwise. And it’s governors like Christie who should be leading the way on this, not banging the evangelical drum on the way to 2016 (and for his Romney surrogacy this year).

If Christie, who enjoys pointing out his love of empirical evidence, were looking at facts and not his own election prospects, he’d see why marriage equality matters. He’d see the positive message it sends to the future generations of Americans. He’d see what the idea of normalcy does for our youth. And if you’d like to see why equality matters, look no further than this statistic passed over to us by Calvin Stowell (@aurosan): “In 1991, the average coming-out age was 25,” Dr. Guy Shilo of TAU’s Bob Shapell School of Social Work reported. “But as of 2010, he notes, it is 16 years old — a dramatic shift.”

You know what kind of message equality sends? It means Christie’s future Republican cohorts might one day be comfortable enough with their sexuality that they won’t feel the need to anonymously press their pant legs on cold bathroom floors and “discreetly” cruise Craigslist at CPAC for shame-filled lovin’.

Governor Christie, you know better. Stop hiding behind the politics, behind the idea of a referendum. If your marriage were put to a popular vote, you’d yell so loud all the windows in Jersey would break.

Slade Sohmer is co-founder/editor-in-chief of HyperVocal.

Slade Sohmer

Slade Sohmer is editor-in-chief of HyperVocal and co-host of SiriusXM's daily "Politics Powered By Twitter" program. Tweet him at @SladeHV.

Comments (46) Write a comment

  2. Pingback: 10 Conservatives Trolling Craigslist for Gay Sex at CPAC

  4. Can’t the veto be overturned? He did what his supporters want. If its so popular overturn his veto and vote him out of office!!

  5. I think you need to move more south. Jersey isn’t far enough for you.

  7. Yes, “get over it”. Don’t ever protest something you find unfair. After all, our betters have made their decision. We must simply accept that they know best, right?

  8. It can be overturned, but right now they don’t have the votes to do that. Maybe soon. Probably not. We’ll see.

  9. Are you fuckig kidding? It’s too political, he’s a coward and uses an ‘I’ll logic’?! A. He’s a politician (someone who practices politics, and in this case conservative politics which oppose gay marriage. B. he’s got more balls than any other politician which you acknowledged. He just doesn’t agree with you and that makes him a coward? C. Ill logic??? He is using he logic he’s supposed to use… He represents the people, not the legislative branch which is what politicians are supposed to do.

    This is the most illogical, emotional and just plain invalid article I’ve ever read.

  10. Good for Christie! I think he’s doing a great job! He’s not influenced by bullshit! Faggots and they’re supporters need to get the fuck over it!! Including YOU!! God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve!!

  11. Doesn’t it now gey put on te ballot for us to all vote for?! Start educating people about equality and voting YES!

  12. What a biased article. There is nothing wrong with opening up such a decision to the people- that is the idea behind democracy. I have no stance on same sex marriage, and perhaps he doesn’t either. A decision of something so controversial should be determined by the people as a whole, and not individuals.

  13. Well, YOU’RE the worst. God is a made up thing that people who didn’t understand science MADE UP. The Bible is written by DUDES.

    Get out of here.

  14. This is the most liberal garbage I’ve ever read. Go get a real job that’s not bitching on the internet. Gays need to be be rounded up paraded through the country and then moved to queer reserves somewhere in the Arctic.

  15. Thats ignorant as shit. We have a secular government that operates on logic. If you can say that we should base policy off of religion, then we might as well just Base legislation off the existence of Santa…

  16. It’s not your job to have a stance on a right that you ALREADY enjoy.

    EQUAL RIGHTS YOU FOOLS!!!

  17. You guys are hilarious.
    You call Christie a coward for doing what he did. Yet over on the other coast, you celebrate the courts overturning the proposition to ban gay marriage. Horrible. Inconsistent. Bullshit.

  18. Very biased acticle. It isn’t the job of the government to promote self destructive behavior. This has nothing to do “hate” or “intolerance” or “bigotry”. Issues this controversial should be voted on by the people.

  19. I hope you’re reported, made arrested, made an example of and have your face plastered all over the tabloids.

    Actually, I’m going to report it.

    Ignorant moron.

  20. I think that Government simply shouldn’t be in the business of marriage. That’s a matter that should only belong to Church, Mosque, Temple, etc. Allow to extra rights to people married or unmarried. Equal rights are equal rights, no?

  21. This comes down to very basic human rights and equality.

    No cunt should be voting whether or not I can get married.

    It fucking disgusts me, that people still exist, who are racist, homophobic or even have beliefs that are against equality.

    The same ignorant bastards wouldn’t be so quick to vote against, if the boot was on the other foot.

    I pray for the sake of their children, that they don’t grow up gay. I’d rather be dead than have had to grow up in a family that didn’t approve of who I was born to be.

  23. I could care less what gays do as long as they stay from me. I believe in God & unless someone has died & returned with outright proof if there’s he exists or not, I keep believing in what’s right until my day comes.

    Even though it’s off subject, even if I didn’t believe in God, I’d believe in him before accepting “SCIENCE” nonsense of humanity evolving from monkeys/apes. How is that possible if monkeys are still here today?

  24. Read the Wikipedia article on evolution, please. No, wait, read the Simple English Wikipedia article on evolution.

  25. This country isn’t strictly a democracy. It has elements of a republic as well, namely the fact that we elect representatives to make decisions for us. What good is a legislature if its decisions are ignored and the issue put to a popular vote?

  27. An overwhelming majority of the gay population {more than the general population} believe that the unborn don’t have the right to LIFE. Bigots !

  28. This issue is quite a bit more important than voting on building a bridge or naming a government building (things legislators do well). In most of the states where legislators have created the first new definition of marriage since the beginning of time, a large majority of the citizens are opposed to it. I applaud the guv for giving the people of NJ the right to decide the issue for their state.

  29. Frankly, the Supreme Court has CLEARLY set a precedent that issues of minority civil rights are NOT to be voted on and are the responsibility of the government. The fact that Christie wants to put a right — which, in Loving v. Virginia the Supreme Court also officially declared that marriage IS a right — up to popular vote is in clear violation of his oath of office. We should be campaigning to have him impeached or recalled — I know this isn’t his typical behavior, but at some point we have to send a message: politics shouldn’t be about ambition or party lines, it should be about doing your damn job and doing it well.

  30. Except, for those of us who pay attention to history (or actually *read* the article, which spelled this out) the Supreme Court has ruled time and time again that rights of minorities are NOT to be left up to the majority. If we did that, there are places in this country where black people would still be segregated.

  31. Uhm, that’s not hilarious. That is how the law of this country works — the rights of the minority are not and have never been up to majority vote. Ever. If the governor can’t remember that, maybe he shouldn’t still be governor.

  32. It’s not necessarily about intolerance or bigotry, no (although as a gay person, I think there needs to be some serious re-thinking done when someone tells me that they’re somehow more deserving of certain rights than I am, which *is* the message being sent), but it IS about the way the laws of this country work.

    The Supreme Court has made it clear through multiple rulings over the history of this country that it is not up to the majority to determine the rights of a minority.

    The Supreme Court ALSO declared that marriage is a right.

    The Constitution guarantees equal rights to all American citizens.

    That’s all anyone should need to know about this situation. There isn’t a sound legal basis for denying marriage equality, and there is even less legal basis for leaving that decision up to a majority vote from the general population.

  34. …….we didn’t evolve from monkeys, we share a common ancestor.

    For future reference, it is better to at least know SOMETHING about a topic before talking about it, thanks.

  35. This is not the first new definition of marriage. By a long shot. Marriage has been redefined dozens of times — as society advances, so does the definition of marriage. The first definition of marriage was “one man and as many women he could take as prisoners of war”.

  36. Pingback: "Chink in the Armor": ESPN's Racial Slur After Jeremy Lin Loss

  39. Everyone who has said anything about gay marriage ruining the sanctity of marriage, or gays shouldn’t be allowed to get married because its a sin, etc. needs to shut the hell up and check your facts!!! Your argument is INVALID and UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!! It says, plain as day, in the U.S. Constitution, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” BAM!!!! say something bitches!!! lol

  41. Pingback: Face-to-Face: Why Marriage Equality Laws Are Really Passing

  42. Pingback: Watch "8," Prop 8 Play Starring Clooney, Pitt, Bacon, Sheen & Many More

  43. Pingback: NJ Gov. Chris Christie to Deliver RNC Keynote Address

  44. And even in the Bible (which many conservatives use as their basis for “traditional marriage”), polygamy is even shown as a valid – and positive – version of marriage.

  45. According to whom?
    The Romans, Chinese, Greeks, Native Americans, Persians, Canadians, Mexicans, & most Europeans would disagree. Oh, and the Bible as well. (Polygamy, Lot & his daughters, buying women as wives from their fathers, etc.)

  46. No, the overwhelming majority of them believes that the federal right to bodily domain extends to women, and that no woman should be forced to have a child if she doesn’t want (or cannot support) one. Anyone who actually *cares* about life would NOT want:
    -a child born into poverty so severe it would only die of starvation and/or exposure shortly after birth,
    -a child born to parents who cannot emotionally or mentally cope with childbirth & child-rearing
    -a woman & fetus to die due to ectopic pregnancy or other uncontrollable medical issues
    -an underage girl to be forced to care for a child she’s not mature enough or independent enough to handle
    -rape victims to be forced to carry reminders of their nightmarish ordeal

    Furthermore, most abortions occur before there is even a nervous system (including brain), heart, or lungs. The majority remove a blastocyst – no more a “baby” than a sperm & egg. But then, the majority of pro-lifers are also anti-contraception & against proper sex education… it’s as if they just want to punish people for enjoying sex.

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.


GET VOCAL - COMMENT

Powered by Facebook Comments

Load more posts