Should Voters Decide on Gay Marriage?

Gov. Chris Christie has long maintained that he would veto any same-sex marriage bill that came across his desk. This week, however, he changed his tune slightly. On Tuesday, a day after he nominated an openly gay man to serve on the state’s highest court, he proposed putting the same-sex marriage issue on the November ballot, leaving the decision to the people of New Jersey.

Democrats have rejected the idea. “Marriage equality isn’t like sports betting,” Senator Raymond Lesniak, a Union County Democrat, told the New York Times. “It’s a civil right, which is already guaranteed in our Constitution. It’s up to the Legislature to guarantee these rights.”

Newark Mayor Cory Booker agrees, and gave an impassioned speech yesterday, saying that civil rights issues should not be put “to a popular vote subject to the sentiments, the passions, of the day.” Watch the video below and then take our poll at the bottom.

Click here to sign up for Baristanet's free daily emails and news alerts.

21 COMMENTS

  1. I voted #2 also. This is Christie’s way of keeping his nose clean with his supporters for his 2016 Presidential run so he can say to red states – but I never supported gay marriage. It is sad at how obvious he is that his term as governor was just a stepping stone to his attempt at the white house. It is sad how he thinks he’s fooled us all into thinking he’s doing his job instead of getting his ducks in a row for 2016.

  2. I’m appalled by the idea of a vote on this issue. Because this is a civil rights issue I think the Federal Court must take up this subject. This right must cross all State boundaries.

  3. Let the people decide, guess why people predisposed to Gay Marriage don’t want a vote on this, because it will get voted down.

    A marriage and a homosexual relationship are two different kinds of relationships and it is a misuse of civil rights law to use that law to try to blot out the difference between two different kinds of things.

    I don’t care what 2 people do, just don’t call it marriage, marriage is as everyone knows between a woman and a man.

  4. This is fundamentally wrong. Their should be no use of the term “Marriage” in legal/government context. It should all be “Civil Unions”, no matter what people are entering that Union.

    Marriages can & should be recognized by organizations, religious authorities, a tribal group a local community or by peers but not by Government.

    DOMA is wrong and Congress should to enact laws about Civil Unions for legal reasons. The Civil Union should just be described as two “people”

  5. I think it’s a great idea for NJ to hold a referendum each time a gay couple wants to marry.

    Referendum 2304: Should Bob marry Ted, or should they just live together for a while and see how it goes?

  6. Yes. Man and Woman. Man pays bride price or dowry to Woman’s father, and receives Woman. Woman stays home, bears children and doesn’t leave kitchen. Takes man’s name and gives man exclusive sexual rights to her body. Man and Woman can never divorce since in the eyes of God they have made a promise till death do us part.

    A relationship is a relationship. Love is Love. Living together and sharing a life is exactly the same. The fact that anyone wants to get involved in limiting the happiness between two people and limiting their rights is pathetic, and it is not the reason we elected them into office.

    A classic statement is: “I don’t care what people do” and then they say that those people can’t be married, because it might tarnish the word “marriage”. Lawyers and Coquettes have already done this.

    Take homosexuality out of this. Imagine two people who were not attractive, or from different religions fell in love and wanted to be married. Society then steps in and says “We don’t want ugly kids running around our state” or “You are ruining the sanctity of religion by intermarrying.”

    I have a neighbor who owns 10 cats and I think that she is a disgusting person for living with them. But she loves them and I respect that. Im not running around trying to ban or limit the amounts of cats she owns as long as she can provide them with food and shelter, its none of my business. Do I think if gay marriage is passed that this will lead to the woman marrying her cats? No, because Im not a moron and I think she is intelligent too.

    Let it go to vote. It WILL pass. If you want to live in a world where your views are better than others, you can go ahead and move to state that agrees with you. (Hint: Go to a state that doesn’t border an Ocean. I dont know why)

  7. They don’t want to let the people vote on this because it will get overwhelmingly defeated. Let the people vote.

    Maobama opposes it btw.

  8. You are right, Herb, re” Obama’s opposition but I believe that no one currently running for the office of the President supports it, including Ron Paul, which I find interesting.

  9. Edward hotel: I, as a part of “everyone”, do not “know” that marriage is between a man and a woman. On what do you base this “fact”?

    As others who have posted here have stated, i would prefer that the state sanction “civil unions” for everyone with all of the legal rights that had been associated with marriage. As every argument against gay marriage that i have seen traces back to religion, religious institutions/those that care about religious teachings can then make decisions about marriage. For those who do not feel that the Bible should be used to decide Civil Rights/Equality, the job of the state is to ensure that we don’t have 2nd class citizens (as Booker and many others have said) without concerns about religion.

  10. Im not too sure about that, Herb. November ballots during a presidential election year bring a larger demographic of voters, voters who normally stay at home during voting hours because they could care less about the issues. I think an issue like equal rights will create a high turn out. And there are a lot more voters in NJ that accept Gay marriage than those who are against it. Im 31, and there aren’t many people my age that discriminate or prejudge others for their religion, sexual preference or nationality. I would assume (only assuming) that those who are younger than me have only increased their tolerance towards their peers. It shocks me to hear my friends parents use derogatory words so casually I can only assume that this was the norm in their days.
    I guarantee that if gays are allowed the same rights as heterosexuals, nothing will change. In fact, wedding planners and tolerant churches will only thrive with the added revenue, not to mention less paperwork for the IRS and healthcare, estate taxes and property ownership will be streamlined. It will be interesting to see the turnout at the polls

  11. Jimmytown, doesn’t your cat loving neighbor have the “civil right” to marry her cats?

    The appeal being made for homosexual marriage rights is not an appeal for judges and lawmakers to reconsider past empirical judgments about similarities and differences between heterosexual and homosexual relationships. Rather, it is an appeal for judges and lawmakers to ignore those distinctions in order not to deny citizens the right to call things what they want to call them. It is a version of an appeal for the protection of free speech, and in this case it is a demand that the speech of particular persons carry the authority to define the structure of reality without regard to the basis of past legal judgments.

  12. Jimmytown, doesn’t your cat loving neighbor have the “civil right” to marry her cats?

    Oh the bestiality thing. Don’t you guys ever get tired of dragging out this debunked justification? But here’s my answer anyway: When his neighbor’s cats can consent to the marriage, then yes.

    The appeal being made for homosexual marriage rights is not an appeal for judges and lawmakers to reconsider past empirical judgments about similarities and differences between heterosexual and homosexual relationships. Rather, it is an appeal for judges and lawmakers to ignore those distinctions in order not to deny citizens the right to call things what they want to call them. It is a version of an appeal for the protection of free speech, and in this case it is a demand that the speech of particular persons carry the authority to define the structure of reality without regard to the basis of past legal judgments.

    Oh brother. Actually, the legal arguments I’ve seen are based on the 14th amendment, and equal protection under the law. It has nothing to do with free speech, and has nothing to do with what the name of something is. Separate but equal, which is what I think the argument is you want to make, was shot down in Brown v. Board of Ed. Try again.

  13. Civil rights include the ensuring of peoples’ physical integrity and safety; protection from discrimination on grounds such as physical or mental disability, gender, religion, race, national origin, age, sexual orientation, or gender identity; and individual rights such as privacy, the freedoms of thought and conscience, speech and expression, religion, the press, and movement.
    No, people cannot marry their car or animal. If you think that homosexuals having the right to be married is the same as marrying your cat, then we have a bigger issue to discuss. Let’s stay on topic. I agree if the word “marriage” is so important and can only be defined by God himself, then take religion and the word out of it. But keep all the rights that are offered to everyone else. If you truly don’t care what 2 people do, and those 2 people had a family (as long as your opinion on 2 people adopting a child is ok) wouldn’t you as a lawyer or friend want to make sure that these two people had access to healthcare and tax benefits the way everyone else does? Or is this deeper than the word “marriage” and is this more of a “We tend to hate things that we dont understand”?

  14. EdwardHotel-to echo on Mike91s comments, if “marriage” did not come along with actual legal rights, your argument might hold some water. Since that is not the case, you can’t claim it is only a “name” that people want the right to.

  15. I understand marriage all too well, I have been married 27 years and counting. It is the word marriage, it is between a woman and a man and everyone knows it.

    Is it a civil rights discrimination against a 12 year-old who is denied the right to enter into marriage? How about if I want to marry my uncle to get on his health insurance, would that be civil rights discrimination?

    Call it what you like but it is not marriage, make up a word and start using that. It can all of the legal standing of a marriage ..I really don’t care.

    P.S.
    I’ve been on a conference call since 9:00 AM and got caught up on this topic .. I needed a outlet and this was fun !

  16. I have been married 27 years and counting.

    And that explains that (to a point). This person probably also believes that sexuality is a choice.

    I’m ignoring the rest of the post and will now wait for him to make the leap that allowing same sex marriage will somehow give him the legal right to argue he can wear a purple tie to a “black tie” event because he “felt like it”.

    (going back to my cave, now)

  17. If procreation is the purpose of marriage then let’s outlaw “post menopausal marriage” or “infertile heterosexual marriage.” All this protection of traditional marriage nonsense is bogus. Have you seen the current state of marriage?
    Get on the right side of history – no vote, no veto. Let anybody marry anybody. Love is love.

  18. Walleroo, that was a primo comment. Except for socially, you truly are my hero. Well, you and FrankGG, actually. He seems to have a lot more fun than you do. But don’t take that personnaly, for a marsupial you certainly do get around. Oh, wait, that didn’t come out right. And some of my best friends are marsupials. Wait — Holly! Make me a drink! (ZAP! You’re a Drink!). Gotta go. Bye, y’all!

  19. I will agree that same-sex marriage should be put to a referendum if Christie also agrees to a public referendum on raising the so-called “millionaire’s tax”, which recent polls show as having a much higher level of majority support among New Jersey residents than even support for same-sex marriage.

  20. A few years ago I had the privilege and honor of standing up for two gay friends and neighbors who got married. They cherish each other and have been together for many years. After the wedding we all went out and enjoyed a delicious meal to celebrate and honor the commitment of love they had made to each other.
    I believe that the decision to share a vow of marriage is the choice of the two people getting married. I see the loving commitment of a marriage as one more way to strengthen the bonds of our community and to demonstrate to our children that strong, devoted and loving families create a healthy and lasting foundation for our entire society.
    Affirming and supporting the loving ties of gay friends and family is one more way to create the bias-free acceptance that prevents the sad double life of conflicted individuals like Larry Craig.

Comments are closed.