New Jersey Governor Chris Christie went on Meet The Press and was asked if he would sign a gay marriage bill if it came to his desk.
Christie said "no."
For the life of me, I can't understand why the media are trying to turn this into a major story.
Christie's views on this subject have always been clear: He supports civil unions but not gay marriage. He believes marriage defines a relationship between one man and one woman. That's it.
Chris Christie made this very clear during his campaign for the office he now holds. And as many times as Christie has been asked about this, the answer has always been the same: no.
Chris Christie is quick to point out that he's vehemently opposed to discrimination based on sexual orientation. He supports equal rights and benefits for gay partners in civil unions and all other rights accorded to gay people. It's just that he draws the line at marriage.
Marriage is for one man and one woman,
Oh, I know that New York State recently lagalized gay marriage and that's thought to be a Big Deal.
But Christie's hardly out of step. As I understand it, New York state is only the sixth state to legalize gay marriage. That leaves 44 other states that haven't legalized it.
Like more than a few states, New Jersey permits legally-sanctioned civil unions. New Jersey took the lead on this and until very long ago such a move was thought to be enlightened. Now, in some people's minds, it's no longer enough.
But in Chris Chritie's world "no" means no.
If the State Legislature of New Jersey feels that strongly about legalizing gay marriage, they can do it. They'll simply have to gather enough votes to override Governor Christie's veto.
BTW: With all of the issues facing the State of New Jersey (not the least of which is the state's dire fiscal predicament) it would seem illogical if this became a defining issue in the upcoming legislative races or in the next gubernatorial campaign. But this issue seems to be all wrapped up in passion and emotion (not logic) and key Democrats such as Senate President Steve Sweeney are already seeking to placate angry liberals by doing mea culpas about any doubts they might have had about gay marriage in the first place. So, expect this to be a rallying point for those on the left.
And, as Obama seeks to solidify his base while facing what appears to be a tough re-election battle, expect
him to move closer to supporting gay marriage as well -- he's already signaled as much.
To people like Sweeney and Obama and the Cuomos "no" can actually mean maybe or even yes.
But Chris Christie has thus far refused to operate that way.
What part of NO don't you understand?