Trenton, NJ – The governor of New Jersey declined to sign a measure into law on Thursday (May 11) that would have made it the first U.S. state to ban child marriage without exception.
Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email
Republican Chris Christie, a supporter of President Donald Trump, said such a ban would conflict with religious customs.
Underage marriage is widespread in the United States, where about 170,000 children were wed between 2000 and 2010 in 38 of the 50 states where data was available, according to activists.
Although age 18 is the minimum for marriage in most of the nation, every state has legal loopholes allowing children to wed.
The New Jersey bill would have prohibited any marriage of children under age 18.
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,” Christie said in a statement.
Opponents of the measure said exceptions should remain for marriages of young members of the military — 17-year-olds can enlist with parental consent — and pregnant teenagers.
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.
Most such marriages are underage girls married to older men, it said.
Communities and ethnic groups in the United States known to practice arranged or forced marriage include Orthodox Jews, Muslims, Mormons, Sikhs and Hmongs, according to Unchained At Last.
N.J. Assemblywoman Nancy Munoz, the bill’s main sponsor, said she was disappointed.
“It’s not an absolute veto, which is good,” she said.
The measure could become law if legislators send it back to the governor with his recommendations.
Studies have shown that child marriage is associated with mental health problems, poverty and increased high school drop-out rates.
The New Jersey bill prompted similar legislation in the states of California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, Pennsylvania and Texas.
They are so twisted. There are many jurisdictions where a minor (under 18) can obtain an abortion without the parents even being informed it ever happened (let alone requiring their permission), yet marriage is so anti-social as to be banned? Here in Ontario there is a law requiring parental consent before a minor can be taken on a field trip, yet no law requiring parental consent, or even just informing the parents, if a minor gets an abortion, even as young as 14 Or 12) years old.
How about banning child transgenders? Thats right parents should have no right to decide the gender of a child till they are a mature adult. And neither should the child have a right to decide his/her gender. Children can’t vote, drive, drink alchohl etc.. They should not be able to decide gender either.
Funny how a person’s perspective can change with age. When I was young, I thought it was creepy for an old man to be with a young girl. Now that I’m older, my perspective has changed. Now, I think it’s creepy for a young girl to be with an old man.
#2 Actually, that is my point. The right to abortion “in secret” without parental knowledge is exactly what child molesters want. Such molesters already control the lives of their victims and this gives them even more control without having to face a parent. But the difference between abortion and marriage is that the alleged child “molester” in the marriage starts with the parents who marry off the daughter. So somehow the first problem, when it is not the parents, is not considered an issue (and is in fact preferred) while the second problem, with the parents, is such a major issue. It shouldn’t be difficult to see behind the facade that this is all about taking control away from the parents into hands of strangers. It should especially be obvious to those reading Israeli news where there are movements in politics to literally give minors (of any age) “rights”, that is, such as the right to choose their own religion and the right to be educated to the morals as determined by social workers based on the social workers own ideas.
As #3 gives another example. It all shows that the “cure” is much, much worse than the alleged disease.
And if I may add another example of twisted. The whole concept of “sanctuary city” is allegedly based on the idea that confrontation will only worsen the problem. The vast majority of those whose culture really calls for child marriage are strongly connected to foreign countries, so much so, that if they get blocked here they will simply ship the child back to the parent country with even worse consequences for the child. Thus leaving no “loophole” when needed will be counter-productive. And all those who support sanctuary are being most arbitrary and inconsistent.
It should be noted that in the Jewish religion, the young woman ALWAYS has the right of refusal in marriage. That is certainly not the case in other cultures and it may be why the political thinkers are trying so hard to have this become law. Laws are sometimes in response to a problem.