Chris Christie Defends Parents' Rights and Trans Rights at GOP Debate
"Republicans believe in less government, not more," he said.

At the fourth Republican debate of the 2024 presidential campaign cycle, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie took an admirable position on parents' rights that put him at odds with much of the rest of his party.
"You do not favor a ban on trans medical treatments for minors, saying it's a parental rights issue," asked moderator Megyn Kelly. "How is it that you think a parent should be able to OK these surgeries—never mind the sterilization of a child—and aren't you way too out of step on this issue to be the Republican nominee?"
"No, I'm not," Christie replied, "because Republicans believe in less government, not more, and less involvement with government, not more involvement in people's lives."
He tied the issue to broader issues of parental choice: "You know what, Megyn? I trust parents. And we're out there saying that we should empower parents in education, we should empower parents to make more decisions about where their kids go to school—I agree. We should empower parents to be teaching the values that they believe in in their homes without the government telling them what those values should be."
He added that "every once in awhile, parents are going to make decisions that we disagree with. But the minute you start to take those rights away from parents, you don't know that slippery slope, what rights are going to be taken away next."
Health care for transgender children has become a political and cultural lighting rod. In fact, just moments later, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis called it child abuse and Vivek Ramaswamy declared that "transgenderism is a mental health disorder."
But Christie is right to reject a ban. He has doctors in his corner on this one: The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that surgical treatments for transgender children should be done on a "case-by-case basis" and include "multidisciplinary input" from health professionals, the child, and the parents. And more importantly, he has freedom in his corner on this one too.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Anyone who thinks Chris Christie is for smaller government need only look at his waistline to see what he really believes in.
So he's going to get government out of all child endangerment laws, and presumably all adult endangerment laws too. Go ahead, parents, rape your children and your parents too, government won't come after you. Is Soros backing this guy?
The freedom to mutilate your kids because some woke teacher brainwashed them without you knowing?
Let us know where you draw the line. Should parents help their kid jump off the roof because he thinks he’s Superman? Probably not, but Supergirl is OK.
I'm really tired of this crap. Female genital mutilation used to be immoral. Now it's OK as long as boys can do it too?
Fuck off, slaver. Or better yet, Fuck Joe.
I'm making $90 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning 16,000 US dollars a month by working on the connection, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply. Everybody must try this job now by just using this website... http://www.Payathome9.com
Chinese parents who want to footbind their daughters rejoice!
FGM? Christie has your back!
Child marriages? Christie has you covered there! Wait he actually did?
https://www.wnd.com/2017/06/chris-christie-child-marriage-and-islam/
Christie seems to be for ignoring abuses of children by parents.
Christie really excels at being wrong on most issues. No wonder the democrats love to interview him. Seriously, when was the last time he was interviewed by anyone other than a democrat media outlet?
Decide to honor kill your daughter because she got raped or is gay? You’ve got Chris Christie in all four corners, simultaneously!
"Female genital mutilation used to be immoral."
I'd argue male genital mutilation is also immoral. I hate it when people give me that bullshit "it's cleaner that way" argument. There's this place in most homes called the shower, and that place has soap and water, it's pretty fucking easy.
We have soap that will make their cock smell like a river in fucking Ireland! It isn't the bronze age before soap was discovered. Stupid superstitions. Stupid Dr. Kellogg.
Its weird that at a time when people are opposing circumcision, they are fine with saying the 5 year olds can know they're women.
I can't speak for everyone that opposes circumcision, but I am firmly against any kind of medical transitioning of minors.
Agreed. Cutting any parts off a perfectly healthy body is a bad idea especially if the only reason for doing it is based in some idiotic superstition.
So, Nick, Matt and KMW the obese authoritarian who never saw a neocon war he didn't support is now a defender of liberty?
Joe honestly should be fired for this piece. But given he lives in DC and since abortion, open borders and of course defending groomers praying on mental illness of youngsters via sexual mutilation is now the gospel of Reason, I'm not surprised.
Joe, first the appeal to authority (AAP) was disingenious to say the least. Who runs AAP? I would bet some liberal art ivy league woke assholes who are not even medical doctors. Sort of like who runs Scientific America today. Second, any moral society would not support parents abusing their kids. Physical or emotional which could impact the rest of their lives.
Joe seems to think say a young daughter decides she is in love with her father and is threating to kill herself unless Dad...well you get the picture. This is the same as a parent treating a childs mental illness (and transgenderism IS a mental illness) by serializing the kid. Disgusting, immoral and demonic.
Joe, focus on the Fed, immoral wars, AIPAC running our foreign policy and the govt ignoring the Bill of Rights. JC...fat Christie is now Reason's favorite Republican?
This is such a weak case to present. Pointing to AAP alone while not mentioning the shifting attitudes from Europe is frankly disappointing. And using freedom for freedom’s sake isn’t really on solid ground either. There are better arguments for and against this singular topic and it’s not found here.
AAP is a political organization at this point.
How about if a parent decides that their child is supposed to be a paraplegic and wants to medically dismember their kid? Should we honor that too?
"every once in awhile, parents are going to make decisions that we disagree with. But the minute you start to take those rights away from parents, you don't know that slippery slope, what rights are going to be taken away next."
What about the child's rights, Chris/Joe? What about the child's rights not to be violently butchered by woke psychopath parents, doctors, and politicians before they even have a meaningful say in the discussion?
We'll take a kid out of their parent's home if they're being abused, but we're 100% in favor of the abuse if it's in the name of this rainbow LGBTP horseshit?
Health care for transgender children
CHILD. ABUSE.
Obviously, the child/young person needs to have the major say in initiating this process. Parents don't get to impose it on kids who don't want it, and perhaps Christie should have mentioned that when he talked about "parental rights". But I know of no cases where parents have tried to do such a thing. The issue is whether parents should be able to ALLOW such surgery (or other treatment, such as hormone blockers) when that is what the young person in question truly wants and thinks is needed. And yes, people can certainly "have a meaningful say in the discussion" well before they are 18. I find it ironic that politicians like DeSantis like to use the rhetoric of "parental choice" while actually denying parents choice. [And while I despise Trump, I think his nickname of "DeSanctimonious" for the Florida governor is quite apt.]
But I know of no cases where parents have tried to do such a thing.
Haven't looked very hard, then? Every "trans toddler" is the result of a parent brainwashing their kid so they can score woke points.
Wrong wrong wrong!
If a kid wants to be a fireman at age 6, should the parents allow it? Hell no!
If a kid wants to play Superman and jump off the roof at age 6, should the parents allow it? Hell no!
If a boy wants to wear a dress at age 6, should the parents allow it? Sure!
If a kid wants to cut off his arm at age 6 because he saw The Fugitive, should the parents allow it? Hell no!
If a kid wants to blind himself at age 6 because he saw Zato Ichi, should the parents allow it? Hell no!
If a boy wants to cut off his dick at age 6, should the parents allow it? Hell no!
Agreed on all points. Glad to see you do agree on #3. (Although the discussion was really not about six-year-olds, but about older children/young people.)
Read through some of the detransition lawsuits and see if you still agree.
Tranny treatments on minors should be 100% banned. Case closed.
It is called informed consent. The children are not being informed or even correctly diagnosed. You can see this in the detransitoon lawsuits. Most of them started on drugs and scheduled for surgeries after 2 sessions with a hospital provided psychiatrist, most of them declaring gender dysmorphia on well over 95% of their patients.
Parents are threatened with their child's suicides despite transitioning not reducing suicide rates. Parents not informed of the life time medical costs. Parents wrongly told that their child can detransitoon at any point with no long term effects.
It is malpractice.
If some leftist piece of shit secretly got my kid mutilated chemically and/or surgically, everyone I loved would share the child’s fate.
Amateur sex change surgery anyone? I don’t hav easy surgical tools, or anesthesia, but I can improvise. Pretty sure I have some old steak knives and rusty hand saw laying around somewhere. I also have a very nice cordless drill.
Should have read ‘anyone involved’
Fucking autocorrect.
"But I know of no cases where parents have tried to do such a thing."
Because you remain deliberately ignorant.
Clearly he's never heard of "Save James".
That FAFU Shamu was there for the complimentary, after-debate buffet.
Shamu? Do you mean Jeffy?
And what US Constitutional Authority was granted to even put the 'Feds' in charge of healthcare in the first place? I'd be far more concerned about illegitimate powers being exercised than what that illegal power wants.
One way or the other; It's just none of the "Union of States" governments job to address this.
I just want to point out that Candidate Christie, while he was Governor Christie, stated that he thought libertarians were 'dangerous'. Yet articulates the libertarian virtue of less government. The truth really is stranger than fiction. 🙂
A consortium of all-you-can-eat smorgasbord restaurant owners label Christie as, “extremely dangerous.” They commented that his portions were quite liberal.
"Health care for transgender children has become a political and cultural lighting rod."
No, it hasn't. Poisoning and mutilating children because insane adults have labeled them "transgender" is the "lightning rod".
Yeah. Nobody is opposing kids having injuries/illnesses dealt with. We do oppose them being neutered at a young age for a "science" that has virtually no actual data behind it.
no actual data behind it.
Nor any coherent reasoning. Nor even a consistent definition of what the condition is that they're "treating".
Christian Scientists as far as I know still use prayer to treat everything from the sniffles to bone cancer. Some states have tried to stop the practice, I'm not 100% certain where all the states stand on this kind of idiocy.
I read it as the usual projection or “accuse your enemy of what you’re doing.”
No, Joe. Healthcare for transgender children isn't a thing. It didn’t become a lightning rod. Nobody gave a shit about metal rods until you started jabbing people with them, waiving them in the air, and shouting “Electrons are just an abstract social construct.” You and your peer group of retards *made* it a lightning rod.
When a botched circumcision caused a transition experiment that ruined the lives of an entire family, nobody denied anyone healthcare or shrieked about transitioning the victim of a surgical accident at a young age. It was when you shitheads considered the multiple suicide outcome a success and said we needed more as state sanctioned and funded policy and to roll back Women's rights and all of Science and Western Civilization 2000+ yrs. that it became a fucking lightning rod.
Ron DeSantis, an out-of-his-depth Bush-backed crony capitalist, gave the best reponse. “You do not have the right to abuse your children.” He just didn’t go far enough.
Even if a child/teen had a mental fetish for amputation (see season 2 of ‘Goliath’ on Amazon for an example, although that character is an adult) you would NOT be justified in cutting off the arms or legs (i.e., mutilating their body) of a minor! Their genitalia and reproductive systems should be considered off limits (except for actual medical emergencies such as, say, cancer).
If you want to let a prepubescent play dress-up, fine. But 90% of them outgrow it at puberty, and even more outgrow it by the time the brain completes development at about age 26-27. Yes, there are some who may still want to transition, and that is what ADULTHOOD is for: making your own decisions, even weird and even seemingly bizarre (to some of us) ones, as long as you do no harm to others. That’s REAL science and REAL libertarianism, not the ideological grooming gobbledygook spread by far left entities in the media, schools, and greed-based sick-care industry… or a deep state Uniparty gasbag like Chris Christie, who somehow manages to be even more of a fat, obnoxious bozo than Donald Trump.
Agreed. Parents shouldn't be able to brainwash their children into their bizarre ideologies. Parents who drag their children to churches, synagogues and mosques need to be stopped. Dragging children into believing in imaginary superstitions at an impressionable age is mental abuse that sets them up for a life of dealing with bizarre mental gymnastics to believe in a superstitious being while also trying to understand the real science that explains the world as it really exists.
How about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Teaching children that it's OK to lie should be a criminal act!
Protect children from the mental and emotional abuse these superstitions create.
Also the abuse that some parents do to their children under the delusion that physical punishment is alright because it's supposedly done out of love also needs to be a criminal act. We must protect children from this physical abuse!
Finally, something I can agree with conservatives on.
The linked AAP article basically says that transgender children's suicidal tendencies are the fault of everyone else in society and not caused directly by feeling they ae the opposite sex. So the recommendation is that society must bend to affirm the new identity.
The way the whole thing reads makes AAP sound like an ideologically conquered organization, spreading dogma dressed up in a lab coat.
From the AAP article, which is not really supportive of parental rights when the parents disagree with gender affirming care:
"Some families may take issue with providers who address gender concerns or offer gender-affirming care. In rare cases, a family may deny access to care that raises concerns about the youth’s welfare and safety; in those cases, additional legal or ethical support may be useful to consider. In such rare situations, pediatric providers may want to familiarize themselves with relevant local consent laws and maintain their primary responsibility for the welfare of the child."
Yeap. It isnt about parents rights. That's a false flag. It is pro ideology. Why states like California encourage schools to transition kids and will remove parental rights from parents who refuse.
You know who else had doctors in his corner?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nazi_doctors
Jodie Whittaker?
"Chris Christie Defends Parents' Rights and Trans Rights at GOP Debate
"Republicans believe in less government, not more," he said."
I think you mean 'he supported child abuse'.
""because Republicans believe in less government"
Hahahahahaha! Seriously?
Less than Democrats.
Smartest of the Three Stooges comparison. Of the two major parties Republicans are the least intrusive. Congrats.
The Monster Who Ate New Jersey does not understand medical malpractice.
Or portion control.
Obvious rule: Parents should have broad authority to do as the will with their children, as they hold their children's rights for them, for their good, until they are ready to care for themselves. They should *not* have the authority to do permanent damage to them.
Should they be able to kill them? No.
Should they be able to mutilate their genitals? No.
Should they be able to cut off their arms and legs? No.
This follows my "pointman" rule of justice. Force of arms should not be used against others unless *you* are willing to be pointman, the first in line to kick in their door, potentially get shot, and stop them by force.
If you are too cowardly to be pointman, then you don't actually believe force of arms should be used against this act, now do you?
What about physical abuse disguised as so called diciplie methods? An adult striking a child only teaches might makes right. Is that a lesson we want them to learn?
What about the mental abuse of dragging kids into temples, mosques, churches and synogogs? Shouldn't the child be allowed to chose their faiths as adults instead of being indoctrinated as impressionable children?
No, that doesn’t teach “might makes right”, it teaches self-discipline, if done properly. If you’ve raised kids, you’ll know they already know they can use violence against others. What you need to teach them is *when* they should use violence, which is exceedingly rare (mainly self-defense and justice). If you think that “dragging” kids to a religious service is mental abuse, you need to read more. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X29v2YFe7SA Pretty much all the empirical evidence shows that religiosity (in this case it's mainly Christian) is positively correlated to good things for individuals and society, and negatively to bad things. All training of children is a form of indoctrination (look up the meaning of the word). Teaching them to love God, love their neighbor, and treat others as you want to be treated *is* the basis for the good things the US culture was founded on, and is *very, very* difficult to see as bad things.
So, where does this proper physical discipline stop and where does physical abuse start? What methods are acceptable and what methods are not acceptable. Draw some lines here.
You can teach a child all those positive traits that you claim superstitions teach by raising them as Libertarians. No superstitions required. It's hard when you don't allow yourself to use violence on them when they anger you and you have to spend time explaining why to them instead of telling them to shut up or you will beat them. But the results are quite pleasant. Children who grow up to understand the value of individual liberty as part of their personality.
Mind you if you strike your children to make them fear your wrath a big magical father in the sky that always watches them and will punish them for their transgressions against that big father, whatever those are and whenever he will get to it probably works better. Of course you hamper their intellectual development by forcing them to believe impossible things, but the world needs ditch diggers too.
I was waiting for a reply.
1. All discipline is giving either benefits for good behavior, or discomfort for bad behavior.
Time outs are discomfort.
Taking privileges is discomfort.
Corporal punishment is discomfort.
What you are claiming through this line of reasoning is either that there is a fundamental difference between one kind of discomfort and the other (and there isn't), or that all discomfort is bad. Either of these lines of argument are ridiculous on their faces.
I gave you a line, permanent damage. If you are willing to be pointman and kick someone's door down to stop less than that, feel free to eat those bullets for what you actually believe. If you don't want to eat those bullets, then you don't actually believe that.
Violence of any amount on a child should *never* be used lightly or to make the parent feel better. It exists for 2 reasons only, because the child deserves it due to evil they have done, and to teach them to cease the behavior. A little pain now is better than the amount of pain they'll have if they don't listen and play on the highway!
You strike me as someone who never raised children. They are capable of quite a bit of evil long before they can effectively reason.
2. Jesus lived, died, and rose again. This isn't superstition. I can give you lots of evidence.
Belief in this truth is positively correlated to good things and negatively to bad things. I can give you lots of evidence of this.
Libertarianism gives you zero incentive to not act like Mao. He is still venerated by millions of Chinese people.
You may believe in your make believe self-creating universe if you want, but don't act like you know anything about belief in God.
All I know is whatever superstitions people follow they have lots of supposed studies and reasons to say that their superstion is the best one for making civilization and raising children. Be it Christians. Muslims, Jews or Zorathostrians they all say their God is the real one, theirs is best and everyone else is wrong. You claim evidence for your Jesus being raised from the dead, I suspect that's not in video or audio format. Muslims claim their illiterate prophet was taught their holy book by an angel. Jews claim that the Cananites they murdered and enslaved had it coming because Moses said so. Religions claim a lot of things but are short on hard evidence. I remain skeptical.
Non physical discipline has more in common with the real world than physical dicipline. It teaches children what they can expect when they violate various customs or laws.
If you speed on the roads you don't get spanked... well if the cop spanks you I'd sue the cop, unless you enjoyed it. Anyway, speeding is punished by a fine, which is paid in money and money represents your time spent earning the money. A time out is in tune with that, it teaches breaking rules results in loss of time. There is no first world civilized place that punishes breaking the rules with a beating.
My wife was beaten by her father. You'd agree with her older sister who still insists being punched , slapped around and slammed into walls was just dicipline. After all, the bruises did heal in time. My father used the belt on the bare bottom when he got home for anything that annoyed my mother during the day.
We chose to not pass those bad parenting methods on and raised our son without violence. It's wasn't easy and he's got quite a stubborn streak but he isn't afraid of anything and stands by his friends and family. He's getting an engineering degree now, is involved with Young Americans for Liberty and has done a lot of door knocking to get libertarian leaning Republicans elected to state office.
He currently is working part time with an after school program helping kids whose parents aren't worth a shit. He says he is a pacifist but he's willing to use a gun in self defense. I call it "never start a fight but sure as hell finish one."
I'm sure you will accuse me of being a liar or worse. I don't care. I know a lot of non violent parents and our kids aren't the ones screaming in restaurants and grocery stores. Kids figure out quick you won't hit them in public places so those are safe spaces for acting up.
"All I know is whatever superstitions people follow they have lots of supposed studies and reasons to say that their superstion is the best one for making civilization and raising children"
Did you watch the video?
"You claim evidence for your Jesus being raised from the dead, I suspect that’s not in video or audio format."
Wrong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wICHji-kh-s&t=249s
"Muslims claim their illiterate prophet was taught their holy book by an angel."
That's kind of funny to poke holes in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nK-_l_UaHYQ
"Jews claim that the Cananites they murdered and enslaved had it coming because Moses said so."
No, it was God's land (Leviticus 25:23). God was kicking the child murderers off his land, using the Israelites to do it. It's private property rights.
And, if you knew how Hebrew hyperbolic language worked, you'd understand it was greatly exaggerated (the common way people at that time and place wrote about military conquests).
"Non physical discipline has more in common with the real world than physical dicipline."
Wow, that's funny! No, in the real world, you suffer mental and physical pain when you're undisciplined. My daughter bites her fingernails, and it hurts when she does it. That's the result of her undisciplined actions. I'll agree with Hobbes on this bit, life is nasty, brutish, and short in the "real world".
"If you speed on the roads you don’t get spanked..."
No, the State sends men-with-guns to kidnap or kill you.
"My wife was beaten by her father."
Sorry to hear that.
"You’d agree with her older sister who still insists being punched , slapped around and slammed into walls was just dicipline."
It's always amazing to me that otherwise rational libertarians (in this case, I saw you defending anarchy below) can regress into using fallacies when their hot button issues are hit. No, I wouldn't!
Note how in this reply chain, I've said the following:
"if done properly" and "Violence of any amount on a child should *never* be used lightly or to make the parent feel better."
What would make you think I'd defend *all* physical punishment? I was very clear!
"We chose to not pass those bad parenting methods on"
I'd agree that if you have the choice between corporal punishment done poorly, vs no corporal punishment at all, I'll always use the latter. You made the better choice. Honestly, if I'd never have to use corporal punishment, I'd be quite glad. That being said, evil cannot be tolerated, and if instant discomfort is the best way, then that's what I'll choose.
The choices I make are to make my children into the best people they can be, which is to say the most moral. I'm quite sure I'm not perfect, but note, it's the current post-modern concept of parenting and society that violence is *never* the answer to anything. I don't agree, and I think that societal concept is laughably stupid.
It's why leftists (usually not libertarians) want to defund the police and replace them with social workers! Now, I want to defund the police and replace them with private law enforcement, but that's an entirely different discussion!
My son hangs out with Catholics at college, he says you sound like a Baptist of some kind. Most likely a reformed sect of the cult. They like to claim they have proof for their faith.
I will point out I've never been shot, beaten or otherwise physically assaulted over a speeding ticket. I pay the fine and move on like the majority of people do. If you don't pay and get belligerent then yeah, bad things happen. Maybe you're just overly aggressive and argumentative because of your toilet training. Question, did the potty chair your parents used have a seat belt?
Nope, not a Baptist. And yes, Christians actually have lots of evidence.
I note you aren't watching the videos I sent. What a waste of a perfectly good mind.
Well, trust me, if you had done anything other than simply submitted to the cartel, you'd have been kidnapped or murdered. Never forget that behind the "niceties" of the police (if there are any) is the threat of death. Submit or die, basically.
See, this nonsense with the random insults ...why appeal to fallacies when you have the mind capable of finding the truth? Are you scared you might have to change your mind, your behavior?
Well, regardless of your unwillingness to learn or to simply see anything that conflicts with your worldview (obviously it's right, because after all *you* hold it and *you* can't be wrong, that's crazy), God loves you anyhow. He doesn't tolerate the way we live, but he actually gave us a way out of the doomed position we find ourselves in.
Well, I presented the offer. It's your choice to research it and take advantage of it if you are willing.
Oh, and just to be clear, a man *actually* beating his wife is one of those things that I will be the pointman to kick down his door and stop. I don't tolerate that.
The woman is an adult capable of making her own choices. In the case of my mother in law she enabled the cover ups of the injuries the kids suffered. She was as much an accessory as a victim.
Even knowing that, I'd likely still kick down the door and risk the bullets. People don't get to be assaulted around me.
The actual slippery slope isn't "take away their ability to mutilate and sterilize their children and soon you won't be able to homeschool." It's "maintaining any standards for society is pro-government and soon you'll live in a fascist dictatorship."
Christie's argument is the same big L Libertarian argument over immigration. If the government does ANYTHING, it's bad. Ok, let's stop policing entirely then. No punishment for murder and rape. It just won't happen because we're all kind, loving people!
Only moron anarchists believe in zero government.
Nice strawman.
In a real anarchy rape is punished by being shot and buried in an unmarked grave. Murder is a lot harder when everyone is armed. Without government schools and mandated education you get rid of 99% of the crazy indoctrination you are complaining about. Without over half your income being taken by government you can live off one parents income so the other parent can pay better attention to their child's internet use and other social interactions to prevent the bullying and other bad behaviors that come from children being online without supervision.
No one who supports actual anarchy expects people to be inherently good. We just figure things couldn't be much worse than how they are with all this government interference.
If there is no government then where do the people who want to intrude in your life go?
Christy is a moron...he will never make the cut. A complete unknown, Ramaswamy, is even kicking his fat @ss.
OMG, 'Reason' is going to endorse Christie for president. Now there's a match made in ... well, a cesspool is all that comes to mind.