The Politics of Chris Christie’s Same Gender Marriage Move


christie4By M. Haberman

Chris Christie doesn’t support same-gender marriage. He vetoed a bill to legalize same-gender nuptials. He has repeatedly made clear where he stands.

But for a GOP base that already views his conservative bona fides warily, his decision not to go down swinging against a court decision that has legalized same-gender marriage in his state could prove problematic.

Christie is clearly banking on his image as a straight-talking pragmatist if he runs an almost certain presidential campaign in 2016, and his supporters see this as in keeping with that. They say he’s already made clear he’s against same-gender marriage.

Christie, who as a Northeastern Republican faces inherent geographic suspicion from with the base, asked the state’s acting attorney general to nix an appeal of the ruling that made same-gender marriage legal in New Jersey.

The reason, according to a statement from his office? He knew he’d lose, and, the implied point goes, what’s the point in going down swinging just to make a point, especially for Christie, a former U.S. attorney?

“Chief Justice Rabner left no ambiguity about the unanimous court’s view on the ultimate decision in this matter when he wrote, same-[gender] couples who cannot marry are not treated equally under the law today,'” the statement from his aides said.

The strategy is similar to the one Mitt Romney used last year – blasting “activist judges” – and, if Christie employs it, he’ll have to navigate more effectively than Romney , especially with same-gender marriage looming as a larger issue in the next two years thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court rulings earlier this year.

Some Republicans privately said they believe that is was a mistake for Christie, who is going to be perceived as the second coming of Rudy Giuliani unless he makes clear that he is, in fact, more conservative than the pro-choice former New York City mayor . And fighting a lost cause would have made headlines, and made him look dedicated to the issue of preserving traditional marriage.

“It’s definitely not a profile in courage,” said Brian Brown, head of the National Organization for Marriage.

Read more at POLITICO.

{ Newscenter}


  1. I am disappointed in the Governor. Like when he not long ago signed a bill to ban therapy to help young toeivahniks do teshuvah.

    His brand and reputation is weakened now, for caving in to the extreme liberals.

  2. The Torah (which was also the legal basis for the American right to rebel against King George III) considers it worse for society than permitting MURDER

    There were always perverts throughout history. But even the Greeks refused to recognize it as marriage.

    If it is not the govt’s business,
    why is polygamy prohibited?
    Because it has “a bad effect” on society?

    Why should the government be able to decide any marriage?
    Let them abolish the concept altogether. Because even from standpoint of biology, a male and female united are properly suitable to reproduce and raise children, which is an indirect benefit for society.

  3. Dont come to us for your support Mr. Cristie. You made it obvious that you care more about pleasing Democrats than your base and I as a faithful voter will not be voting this election.

  4. The Torah DOES require that you be concerned about the personal preferences of non-Jews.

    For a national/sociological outlook: the Germans would privately state that foremost their better family life was where their military ability vis a vis the french was sourced.

    A Russian defector in the 80?s wrote that the intangible basis for the U.S. superiority in the Cold War was Family life ,which communism trampled.
    He further wrote that Russia had been pouring in tens of millions $ to
    organizations of perverts,feminists,etc.,all in order to weaken the traditional family socio/structure