Governor is Waiting to Veto Gay Marriage Legislation

[chance1]

There are obese Democrats and there are obese Republicans. It is a national health problem which transcends all walks of life. More importantly, a moral attack on an individual is an attack on a community, a community which includes as many friends as foes. That isn't to say we should not be concerned, only that we should frame it as a matter of national health, not a moral judgment that skinnier people are better.

hard to argue with your well thought out argument

I take no issue with CC's weight - if I was his wife it would upset me that he could not/would not figure a way to get it down in order to live a healthier life for him and his family

as for his gay marriage stance and his "being a bigot" as some have said

relatively speaking, CC is a moderate

relatively

on this issue, Republicans have sorta painted themselves into a corner - which is a godsend to democrats politically

but a disgrace to americans nationally

i'm disappointed with CC BUT he has made decisions to hire gays for important positions in his administration/judgeships that suggest he is one of the better ones

but unfortunately will not/has not come the whole way

 

[chance1]

^^ once again reading is not your long suit

no excuses being made - just real life points of view based on reading and listening and watching

try it sometime

as for his actions, he does what he says he's going to do - for that i give him credit

on this i wish that was not his position

but there's no denying he's a moderate who has worked quite nicely with NJ dems on state issues

Cory Booker - a rising Dem star and mayor of Newark - is a big fan of CC

look it up champ

hiring of gays for important positions is REALLY important - especially on the bench

not sure why you can't understand that

to you all repubs are the same

serious brain drain going on

 

[chance1]

And I'm not asking people to be single issue voters. I think there is a lot about Christie I don't like, and I think in the bigger picture he's still part of a political party that does not have the country's best interests in mind. I could not find myself voting for a member of that political party.



I think it's a case of "I care more about my checkbook then my own rights".

you have a reasoned poster who has patiently explained why Christie is on balance a good governor

that his position on gay marriage bothers him a great deal

he lives IN New Jersey

he has given you specific examples

this is where you say

"thanks for your POV which is obviously reasoned"

but u can't

you're an idealogue who hates all republicans

PERIOD

weak as water

 

[chance1]

You have no support and only meandering haiku. Good luck with that. You only demonstrate partisan ranting, and not anything with any substance.

Ignore list

you like to post

you don't bother to read other's posts or the news or watch the news

you don't like people who don't agree with u

you should put everyone on ignore

 

[BJS501]

If 'controversial' issues are put on the ballot, then what's the point of having a state government?

 

[Rolyo85]

The point, as I understand it, is that not everything can get the necessary signatures to be put in the ballot? If I'm wrong, I'd like for someone to explain that pls.

 

[Kulindahr]

Since it seems his weight won't go away....

I once was at a school run by a church, where the head admin secretary was about Christie's size, maybe even bigger. We all referred to her as "the largest religious body in America". I suppose Christie might qualify as the largest political body in America.

Hiring gays to certain positions doesn't matter in the end, when the man is pushing policy that is counter to the LGBT movement.

Yeah, it's kind of judging a cake at a baking contest, and marveling at the intricate work on the frosting -- but when you bite in, it's obvious the baker used moldy flour.

If 'controversial' issues are put on the ballot, then what's the point of having a state government?

To have someone to do the boring crap.

The point, as I understand it, is that not everything can get the necessary signatures to be put in the ballot? If I'm wrong, I'd like for someone to explain that pls.

Yeah. The idea is that if the people get excited enough about an issue, they can tell the legislature to go stuff it -- or, more eloquently, to provide an avenue so the will of the people can prevail over the narrow interests of the politicians.

 

[JB3]

And I'm not asking people to be single issue voters. I think there is a lot about Christie I don't like, and I think in the bigger picture he's still part of a political party that does not have the country's best interests in mind. I could not find myself voting for a member of that political party.



I think it's a case of "I care more about my checkbook then my own rights".

Who are you to decide that for someone else?

Frankly, even if that is the case, gay marriage doesn't mean a damn thing if you're homeless and destitute and can't exercise that right. Sure, you've got the right, but it doesn't do you any good in that situation.

 

[Rolyo85]

Yeah. The idea is that if the people get excited enough about an issue, they can tell the legislature to go stuff it -- or, more eloquently, to provide an avenue so the will of the people can prevail over the narrow interests of the politicians.

Which is how Prop 8 came into being if I recall ^_^ Another solid argument that "the people" as a whole should not be given too much power to direct the course of social change...

 

[Lostlover]

I love how calling a bigot a "fat ass" can irritate a gay man, while as a gay man one can ignore homophobic governance by choosing to focus on less important issues, like taxes. And people wonder why a lot of the public doesn't take gay people seriously. How can you respect this kind of response?

If I was a straight man reading this thread, I'd probably laugh at the responses defending and or indifferent to Christie. I probably would feel the need to ask gay men "How can you defend someone who wants you to be a second-class citizen?"

There are no good answers. I know straight people who would be more offended by Christie than some of the gays in here.

Maybe it is wishful thinking, but I'm just going to think that these answers aren't representative of the gay community, but instead responses from the fringe.

 

[JB3]

I love how calling a bigot a "fat ass" can irritate a gay man, while as a gay man one can ignore homophobic governance by choosing to focus on less important issues, like taxes. And people wonder why a lot of the public doesn't take gay people seriously. How can you respect this kind of response?

If I was a straight man reading this thread, I'd probably laugh at the responses defending and or indifferent to Christie. I probably would feel the need to ask gay men "How can you defend someone who wants you to be a second-class citizen?"

There are no good answers. I know straight people who would be more offended by Christie than some of the gays in here.

Maybe it is wishful thinking, but I'm just going to think that these answers aren't representative of the gay community, but instead responses from the fringe.

Or, did you ever think that stooping to his level only hurts our cause? What does his fat-assedness have to do with his stance on gay rights? (Hint: Just about as much as all of the stereotypes have to do with being gay.) No one is ignoring his homophobia; as a matter of fact, what many have said in this thread is that we should be focusing MORE on it instead of his weight.

There are substantial, legitimate reasons to tear Christie down without resorting to the schoolyard bullying you have. Its hard to respect the opinion of a guy that claims to want to talk about one thing, but instead chooses to behave like a 12 year old girl.

 

[Kulindahr]

Who are you to decide that for someone else?

Frankly, even if that is the case, gay marriage doesn't mean a damn thing if you're homeless and destitute and can't exercise that right. Sure, you've got the right, but it doesn't do you any good in that situation.

Point of information:

during my stint at being homeless, I met a couple who met while they were homeless and got married while they were homeless, and it brought them a great deal of joy. another homeless person told me they got married at a church that "just happens" to forget to look the front doors on really cold nights (an issue the city won't tackle because [a] they don't want homeless people freezing to death and they really don't want to burn money on a religious freedom case).



Point being: the destitute can exercise that right.





p.s. -- the New York Times did a piece on homeless weddings, if you want something not anecdotal.

 

[Kulindahr]

Which is how Prop 8 came into being if I recall ^_^ Another solid argument that "the people" as a whole should not be given too much power to direct the course of social change...

This is an issue on which the Party of Jefferson disagrees with Jefferson -- he had lots of misgivings about democracy.

 

[Kulindahr]

I love how calling a bigot a "fat ass" can irritate a gay man, while as a gay man one can ignore homophobic governance by choosing to focus on less important issues, like taxes. And people wonder why a lot of the public doesn't take gay people seriously. How can you respect this kind of response?

If I was a straight man reading this thread, I'd probably laugh at the responses defending and or indifferent to Christie. I probably would feel the need to ask gay men "How can you defend someone who wants you to be a second-class citizen?"

There are no good answers. I know straight people who would be more offended by Christie than some of the gays in here.

Maybe it is wishful thinking, but I'm just going to think that these answers aren't representative of the gay community, but instead responses from the fringe.

Actually I think intelligent people, gay or straight, wouldn't find anyone here "defending" Christie at all, just coming down hard on the very juvenile behavior of making a point of his being overweight rather than focusing on the real issue.

Intelligent people would respect that because they understand that there's no connection between a man's body mass and his political or personal views, and to link the two is a total sign of immaturity. Then they'd wonder how gays expect to be taken seriously when such juvenile people act as though they're representatives of the community.




'Jus' sayin'."

 

[Rolyo85]

Well, actually, a bit off-topic, but obesity has to me always been a sign of mental deficiency (when it isn't genetic)...

 

[hotatlboi]

Well, actually, a bit off-topic, but obesity has to me always been a sign of mental deficiency (when it isn't genetic)...

Or depression.

 

[Zeno Lorea]

Re: Governor

This is why a moderator shouldn't moderate a thread he is writing in (especially when he's going off-topic himself.)

Right on! Now THAT should be in the official rules of this website. There are some fantastic moderators on here, and some others who are worthless. And I've seen threads closed by moderators after they virtually hijacked them. To have the last word, as it were.

Now let's all start pretending Christie is not a big fat bigot, but just a bigot, and not allow anyone to change the subject.

 

[hotatlboi]

As expected, Christie has vetoed the bill.

The legislature has until the end of Jan 2014 to attempt to override.

 

[Just_Believe18]

Stop making excuses for Christie. Regardless if he promised to veto gay marriage and stood by his "Republican moral character," it is still wrong.

This was a social injustice.

You should be outraged! You should be angry! This man doesn't deserve an explanation, he deserves spit in his face! For every self-respecting homosexual, there comes a time when you no longer accept your rights as a "political issue." I am not a veto, nor am I campaign promise. I am an American citizen, and my future partner that I raise a home and family with should be recognized by the state and federal government as my husband. There is no compromise. There is no excuse. There is only equality and fairness under the law that I abide and pay taxes for!

 

[Zeno Lorea]

As expected, Christie has vetoed the bill.

The legislature has until the end of Jan 2014 to attempt to override.

And if they do that, when will couples be able to marry? By the way, the will override the veto won't they? It doesn't make sense to vote "yes" the first time and "no" the second, or am I missing something here?