Box Turtle Bulletin
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobby“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobbyJanuary 24th, 2012
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie today said that he would veto any marriage quality bill reaching his desk. The bill, which passed the Senate Judiciary Committee today in an 8-4 vote, was identified as a top priority for state Democratic lawmakers. Christie instead urged lawmakers to pass a bill calling for a state referendum on marriage, saying “The institution of marriage if too serious to be treated like a political football.” Given that there are whispers that Christie is on the short list for the GOP vice presidential nomination, this is one issue he clearly wants to keep as far away from his desk as possible.
Christie also called for a strengthening legal protections under the state’s separate and unequal civil union law, specifically on questions of hospital visitation. Federal medicare regulations have already trumped state laws when it comes to visitation rights.
Latest Posts
Featured Reports
In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.
When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.
In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.
On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.
Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"
At last, the truth can now be told.
Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!
And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.
Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.
Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.
Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.
The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.
“Google” is a trademark of Google Inc.
© Box Turtle Bulletin. All Rights Reserved.
Posts 
Posts via daily email:
Mark F.
January 24th, 2012
No surprise.
The legislature should pass the marriage bill, have Christie veto it, and then go for a “seperate but sort of equal” “civil unions” law.
Jim Burroway
January 24th, 2012
New Jersey already has a separate but not equal civil unions law.
Lucrece
January 24th, 2012
He’s always been a douchebag, and I called it earlier.
He’s trying to pretend to be reasonable when his solution amounts to “Do we straight people want to consider gay people our equals?”
As if a ballot vote on a presidential election where a Republican base is particularly energized to dethrone a Democratic president is a fair representation of the “voice of the people”.
As if the “voice of the people” ever amounted to a pathetic 64% voter turn-out for the last election.
Stefan
January 24th, 2012
Thankfully those in the Senate will have nothing of it and pass the bill regardless.
Ryan
January 24th, 2012
He would never be President as a Republican if he signed that bill. Only virulently anti-gay candidates would ever make it through a Republican primary. The weird part is why he bothered playing coy to begin with. Oh, well. Hopefully Washington will pass without problems, at least.
JohnAGJ
January 24th, 2012
How would having a referendum be any less of making this a “political football” than the legislature voting on it? Seems to me with money pouring in on both sides even more in a referendum than in pressuring legislators the political donny-brook would be more intense with the former rather than the latter.
Pogovio
January 24th, 2012
Christie is not a terrible guy, he’s an old style Republican, before all the litmus tests were instituted. I think he is banking on a solid Republican defeat, in hopes that the current radical hate mongering Republican establishment is discredited. If that happens, there’s an opening for him to jump in in 2016. In the current environment, the Republican base would turn against him as soon as they find out about his moderate beliefs.
He can forget about a national career as long as the Tea Party tail is wagging the Republican dog.
Mark F.
January 24th, 2012
“New Jersey already has a separate but not equal civil unions law.”
But it could be improved, correct?
Tone
January 24th, 2012
Human rights are too important to be subjected to tyranny of the majority. The governor is being cowardly.
customartist
January 25th, 2012
Chris Christie KNOWS he is doing that which is Wrong, and for Political motives. He is not representing the will of the People.
The LARGER question is:
Will the New Jersey GOP Congress go along with him by passing a Referrendum, and against the Will of the Citizenry? [52% For v/s 42 % Against] It’s pretty clear.
Chris has confirmed that he will veto it – so go ahead! and let his chips fall where they may.
Charles
January 25th, 2012
Christie is punting on the issue. That is what politician are doing when they call for one. I think we all know that this issue is going to the United States Supreme Court.
Timothy Kincaid
January 25th, 2012
I’m not inclined to beat up on Christie. I do think his position is far far better than that of most other Governors, including some Democrats. In fact, it is better that that of the President – in that Christie isn’t just “supportive” of civil unions but actually called for a bill strengthening any inequalities.
In response to the fact that civil unions are in reality not equal to marriage, his response is “well let’s make them equal.” At this point I don’t think that is possible – history suggests otherwise. But I don’t think his response is any indication of ill will.
Christie isn’t homophobic or cowardly or full of bigotry or hatred. He simply is a victim of prejudice. Clearly he likes and respects gay people enough to put the first gay person on the NJ Supreme Court. Clearly he is sufficiently immune to anti-gay wackos that he confidently discusses why civil unions are needed in interviews.
But he hasn’t awakened to the reality that he still believes somewhere on a deep level that it is somehow preferable to be straight.
Prejudice is not an indication of evil. It is usually a holdover from early upbringing and often not even conscious. And it often harms those with it more than anyone.
Christie has no desire to harm the gay people he knows. But prejudice sits on his shoulder and says, “Civil unions are good enough. It will solve all the problems those gay folk have and isn’t that nice of you.” And prejudice carefully covers over the fact that there is inherent inequality when dividing citizens in any way so that Christie probably has no conscious awareness that this act, in and of itself, continues a pattern of institutionalized disrespect.
I’m sad that it pushed a “yeah, but” into Christie’s thinking on this issue. But I know that there is hope with those who operate from prejudice.
There still is time. What Chris Christie needs is a Jerry Sanders moment. He needs to sit and look in the eyes of people he knows and loves and see how this veto will hurt them.
Now is the time to Christie’s friends to take a stand. They have to let him know that they DO NOT “understand his position” or “know that he’s a man of faith” or any of the other “my gay friends” comments we hear. They need to tell him, “Chris, you know me, you’ve been my friend for decades. When you veto this bill, you are telling me that I am inferior. I know you don’t really believe that. I know you respect me. But your action in vetoing marriage demeans me.”
It’s time to make it personal.
Ryan
January 25th, 2012
I agree that it doesn’t appear that Christie has any particular animosity towards gay people, but no amount of making it “personal” will outweigh Christie’s personal desire to become President someday. This would be impossible if he personally signs this bill. I’m not sure why you claim that Christie is more progressive than Obama on this issue. Obama also supports Civil Unions. I don’t know if Christie supports the repeal of DOMA like Obama does, or if, as President, he would defend DOMA in court, but again, he could not support repeal and still win a GOP nomination, so it’s reasonable to assume he does not.
Reed Boyer
January 25th, 2012
Christie a victim? Hmmm. I’m inclined to agree. Of irrational fear, insecurity, etc. And it would seem clear that, when not bellowing, he uses his size to keep others at a distance. And, I’d think, stuffs the feelings with food.
Or possibly he’s simply gluttonous – and doesn’t want to share his special privileges with “those others.”
Iamposterity
January 25th, 2012
We should start an online game called Smell the Excrement!
Here are the rules:
When you see moral legislation, point to the Catholic Sacrament it is connected to.
FYI since I own all the rights and privilages I can change the rules to make sure I always win and everyone else always looses.
Oh I’m sorry Benedict did I steal your tactic! Here let me make it better by doing absolutely nothing to rectify my mistake…
Leave A Comment