Gov. Christie Declines to Ban Child Marriage Because It ‘Would Violate’ Some ‘Religious Traditions’


Christie decided to conditionally veto the bill and send it back to the legislature with proposed changes. He recommended that an exception be provided that would allow judges to approve marriages for 16- and 17-year olds.

As part of his rationale for not signing the bill into law, Christie cited religious customs that conflict with the bill’s intent.

I agree that protecting the well-being, dignity, and freedom of minors is vital, but the severe bar this bill creates is not necessary to address the concerns voiced by the bill’s proponents and does not comport with the sensibilities and, in some cases, the religious customs, of the people of this State.”

Without citing specifics, it appeared Christie could have been referring to certain Muslim and Christian practices when it comes to child marriage.

Opponents of the bill argued that exceptions should remain for young members of the military and pregnant teenagers who do not want children born out of wedlock. Those 17 years old are able to enlist in the military with parental consent.

Other reasons given by those opposing the bill include the fact that 16 is the age of sexual consent in New Jersey and also the age at which an abortion can be obtained without parental consent.

In most states, the minimum age for marriage is 18, though every state provides legal loopholes that allow those younger to wed. Reuters has reported that underage marriage is more widespread than the public might think, with about 170,000 children wed between 2000 and 2010 in 38 of the 50 states where data was available.

The bill as it was already approved by both houses of the legislature would have made New Jersey the first state to outlaw child marriage altogether, according to Unchained At Last, a group that opposes arranged and forced marriages.”

Mr Christie conditionally vetoed the measure, sending it back to the state legislature with proposed changes. He said it should have an exception so a judge can approve marriages for 16- and 17-year-olds.

“An exclusion without exceptions would violate the cultures and traditions of some communities in New Jersey based on religious traditions,” Mr Christie said in a statement.

Despite the disappointment expressed by those supporting the legislation, the bill might still become law if the legislature sends it back to Christie with his recommendations included. Other options include the legislature just letting the bill die or voting to override the conditional veto.

To this point, no Christie veto has ever been overridden.

Source: The Independent

 



Share

4,239 Comments

  1. Lori Earle
  2. Cathy
  3. Wendi Jones

Leave a Reply

Pin It on Pinterest