« Previous Post | Pop & Hiss Home | Next Post »

Bruce Springsteen backs Jersey's gay-marriage bill

Bruce Springsteen-Sports Arena 2007 Bruce Springsteen has thrown his support behind legislation backing same-sex marriage in his home state of New Jersey, with a note posted Tuesday night on his website. The proposal is due to be voted on Thursday by the state’s Senate.

“Like many of you who live in New Jersey, I've been following the progress of the marriage-equality legislation currently being considered in Trenton,” Springsteen writes. “I've long believed in and have always spoken out for the rights of same sex couples and fully agree with Governor [Jon] Corzine when he writes that, ‘The marriage-equality issue should be recognized for what it truly is -- a civil rights issue that must be approved to assure that every citizen is treated equally under the law.’ "

Springsteen continues, "I couldn't agree more with that statement and urge those who support equal treatment for our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters to let their voices be heard now.”

Chris Christie, the state’s incoming Republican governor, however, has said he will veto the measure if it is passed, despite classifying himself as a Springsteen fan. On Monday, the bill was approved by one vote by a state Senate committee, according to the Associated Press, but Democrats are saying they may not have the 21 votes needed for it to pass in the Senate.

-- Randy Lewis

Photo: Bruce Springsteen at the Los Angeles Sports Arena in 2007. Credit: Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times

Comments () | Archives (19)

So Springsteen is a buffoon - what else is new.

While I certainly commend Mr. Springsteen for his gesture, it is clear that the majority of heterosexuals in the United States DO support a system of Apartheid for LGTB Americans.

Many heterosexuals support this system of Apartheid for LGTB Americans each and every time they walk into a voting booth to vote on our civil rights. Feeling that they have the right to do so and that they should be allowed the power to determine another's civil liberties simply because they feel that they are somehow better than the LGTB children they created. And that their LGTB children are deserving of a lesser life than they are. (All the while screaming about morality???)

This is vile, immoral and Unconstitutional. (Even when the majority has agreed that it's OK, 'just this once' since it's only being done to the 100% heterosexually created LGTB citizens.)

So, while many heterosexuals are condoning the carving of their LGTB children from the Constitution state-by-state while implementing this system of Gay Apartheid in the United States, it is that very document that will ultimately keep its promise to LGTB citizens and protect us from the very heterosexuals that created us (either by nature or nurture) in the first place.

From the Dictionary:

A policy or practice of separating or segregating groups.

Kudos to Bruce Springsteen for supporting marriage equality in NJ.

And kudos to CT on the one anniversary of its marriage equality law on 11/12.
And congrats to all the couples coming to CT to wed from all across the country, many of whom have been together for 20, 30 and 40 years!

Onward to equality,
Joe Mustich, Justice of the Peace,
Washington, Connecticut, USA

Question to Steve: (YOUR POST: December 09, 2009 at 12:27 PM)

If Mr. Springsteen's belief that all human beings are created equal and entitled to equal treatment under the law makes him a buffoon, what does that make YOU?

A Christian?

Why does it matter who or what Springsteen backs? Or is that for people unafraid to think for themselves - which is what it sounds like. These celebrity "causes" are disgusting. Let people think for themselves!

Who cares what tis creepy old fart thinks. Stick what you do know. Music.

Contrary to Mr. Springsteen's beliefs, we all currently have the right to marry in this country. Any man or woman has the right to marry. Homosexuality is not a civil rights issue, it's a lifestyle. No way should we change laws for a lifestyle issue.

Well if Bruce Springsteen thinks "gay marriage" is a cool idea, that just changes just about everything. After all, the ability to strum a guitar makes you an expert in all things. I'm quite sure that when a news journalist goes to the hospital looking for medical advice, they ask for the best musician on the staff.

If we allowed the "majority" to make decisions on the rights of the minorities, we would never have abolished slavery.

One groups personal or religious beliefs should not infringe upon the legal rights of another group.

Every adult should have the right to marry the adult they love.
Not to mention every other legal aspect that goes along with it, like medical decisions, inheritance laws, taxes, etc.

So Christie the new buffoon on the block is jiggling his massive potbelly and poking forth at destiny with a veto.

1) This allows him to take all the blame, and frees the state senators to recognize that the year is 2009, and to act the age is not only worth living for, but the American way: ever improving conditions for society to thrive.

2) As for Christie, he might consider the hazards of falling short. In Jersey. His allies cannot afford to ally with a governor whose politics rise of hate, especially when the state is crushed in debt--a debt owed to another, itself endebted entity, who is overrun by legally married, spiritually loving, sexually self-actualised, of either sex, who wish the same privilege of choice to be extended to their fellow beings. Anyway, it's a cheapshot to call Christie and the phobics repugnant, it's more effective to teach them finance.

Chris gets +1 internet.

Bruce who? Oh, you mean that guy with the raspy voice who had a string of rock hits about 25 years ago? Now he's an expert on social and political issues? Maybe he should spend more time on writing a good song instead of telling the majority of Americans that unless we think like him we're not cool.

"[...] Chris Christie, the state’s incoming Republican governor, however, has said he will veto the measure if it is passed, despite classifying himself as a Springsteen fan. [...]"

Why is necessary for LA Times to automatically transcend in idiocy when it comes to gay marriage? "Despite" - what? Do Springsteen's fans care about his views on gay marriage? Global heating? Acalouf cuisine? Fortunately not - heavens, next time you'll mention Milli Vannilli's and Hanna Montana's expertise vis-a-vis Haldron Collider's relevance -

In 1974 at the age of 23 and working as a sales merchandiser on Madison Avenue in my hometown of New York City, I was so moved by the Bruce Springsteen album which included one of his signature songs Sandy that I brought the vinyl record into my Fortune 100 company's office and tried to motivate my co-workers to start listening to Bruce immediately. Thanksgiving 1980 I went to see Bruce and the E Street Band at the Garden and that was the most electrifying rock concert I have ever seen. I got married the following year and we went to a rocking Bruce concert at the Meadow lands. Bruce and Oprah and Alec Baldwin should stay out of politics unless they have sheepskin and credentials in political science or have held office.Something always boomerangs. I myself have nothing against gays getting married but I want the politicians to study any repercussions to the economy or health care or social security. If that study works I am okay with everything. Did Bruce think of this? He had a good rep in South Jersey.

"Contrary to Mr. Springsteen's beliefs, we all currently have the right to marry in this country. Any man or woman has the right to marry. Homosexuality is not a civil rights issue, it's a lifestyle. No way should we change laws for a lifestyle issue. "

Very clever reasoning, Shawn. Unfortunately those of us who have actually studied U.S. Constitutional Law will know this is the exact same argument that was thrown out in 1967, when the Supreme Court decided in Loving v. Virginia that a ban on interracial marriage violated the 14th amendment.

The state of Virginia argued that the law was already equal, since anybody could get married to a member of their own race. After all, interracial couples are making a lifestyle choice, right Shawn?

I'm wondering why this blog has gotten so political - I've seen eitries that delve into nationalized healthcare and gay marriage rights. Isn't this a MUSIC blog? (Unless I'm totally missing the meaning of Pop & Hiss) Hiss I don't check on it to hear what Springstein has to say about healthcare. I check it to see what albums to buy or pass on.
He's a freaking musician, that makes him qualified to play music. His backing of the gay marriage bill is the equivalent of me piping in on the possible chord progressions in a song he's writing. IT DOES NOT MATTER.

THINK FOR YOURSELF - if you have to listen to Springstein to make up your mind on gay rights you're an idiot!

And to the writers of this blog - leave it alone for god's sake! If you want to be a political blogger, I'm sure POLITICO would love your input...

I'm tired of Springsteen sticking his Jersey high-school level intellect into every liberal cause. I'm frankly sick
of his posturing at every rock hall of fame show, he's good
in a certain range of music, but for him to attempt to share lead vocals with the great Sam Moore on Soul Man, actually makes the Blues Brothers sound like the authentic thing. Bruce takes himself too seriously today, years ago he was fresh, a throw-back to rock and roll's roots. Now he's a tired cliche. Get off your high-horse Bruce.

For all you people who are bashing Springsteen for this, if you read what he posted on his website you would know that all he is doing is backing something that he believes in. Everyone has an opinion, and no matter what it is, people speak out on it. If YOU had the power to try to swing the bill's outcome the way that you wanted, wouldn't you try. Whether you are for or against the bill, you would most likely try to influence the outcome if you could, and Springsteen can. He has no say and doesn't determine anything, but he's just stating his opinion on the issue. This country was built on freedom of speech, so everybody who wants him to shut up on the issue is an idiot and isn't following what this country is about.

Also, he's just trying to get people who support gay marriage to voice their opinion and stand up for what they believe in. Gay marriage is a sensitive subject and many people who support it don't want to openly say they do because they get greatly criticized for it. Springsteen publicly saying that he supports gay marriage might inspire people who wouldn't normally speak out to speak out. Springsteen knew that he would get criticized heavily for this, but you have to stand up for what you believe in, no matter if you are for OR against it. Springsteen is doing what he should--saying what he believes, whether you agree with him or not.

in Ocean Grove NJ at The Starving Artist Theater
will be premiered noted playwright LARRY MYERS new work

"Bruce Springsteen Lie Detector Test"

Dr Myers runs an international Playwriting Center in NYC focussing on service & globalization

He has won many awards & is an authority on dramatic arts


Recommended on Facebook

In Case You Missed It...


Recent Posts

Tweets and retweets from L.A. Times staff writers.



Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: