Path 2

News LGBTQ+ Friday, Jun 26 2015

New GOP Marriage Equality Position Will Be Constitutional Amendment

Jun 26, 2015

Now that the Supreme Court has recognized marriage equality nationwide, the race is on to stake out the far right fringes of the Republican Party. Scott Walker and Ted Cruz have an early lead with their support for a constitutional amendment to allow states to ban marriage equality.

Sure Marco Rubio called homosexuality a sin. Jeb Bush thinks the fight against marriage equality should continue because “we need to be stalwart supporters of traditional marriage.” And Ben Carson thinks being gay is a choice because “a lot of people who go into prison go into prison straight — and when they come out, they’re gay.”

But now that conservatives lost yet another Supreme Court case, GOP candidates are going to have to appease the Tea Party and support a constitutional amendment. Scott Walker saw the writing on the wall and took the extreme position before he needed to. Who will be next?


Scott Walker

Walker Was In Favor Of Bans On Same Sex Marriage

Walker Said He Did Not Know If Same-Sex Marriage Bans Were Constitutional, But He Thought That Were Right.  According to the Des Moines Register, “When the Register asked Tuesday if he’s in favor of a ban on same sex marriage, he said: ‘I have been. I voted for it in the Legislature when I was a member. I voted for a constitutional amendment in 2006 when it was on the ballot in Wisconsin.’ Asked if he believes such bans are constitutional, he said: ‘I’m not a lawyer, I don’t know if they’re constitutional. I just think they’re right. I think it’s appropriate for the states to be able to define what marriage is.’” [Des Moines Register,4/22/15]

Walker Was In Favor Of A Constitutional Amendment Allowing States To Define Marriage As Between One Man And One Woman

Walker Backed Amendment Allowing States To Ban Same-Sex Marriage.  According to CBS News, “Potential Republican presidential candidate and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker says that he would support a constitutional amendment allowing states to enact same-sex marriage bans. ‘I personally believe that marriage is between one man and one woman,’ Walker said Sunday on ABC News, answering a question about an upcoming Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage. ‘If the court decides that, the only next approach is for those who are supporters of marriage being defined as between one man and one woman is ultimately to consider pursuing a constitutional amendment.’” [CBS News, 6/7/15]

Walker Said That If The Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Same Sex Marriage “The Only Other Viable Option Out There Is To Support A Constitutional Amendment Which I Would” ““I’m still hoping.  I may be one of the few out there, but I’m still hoping that the U.S. Supreme Court, not in our case, but it would apply to our state’s case if these other states are victorious.  I still am going to hope that the United States Supreme Court will say, ‘yes indeed, states have a right to define what marriage is.’ I voted for that as a state lawmaker in legislation.  I voted for that as just a voter in Wisconsin’s Constitution. I defended it as Governor along with our Attorney General in the federal court, the Court of Appeals and tried to get it to the U.S. Supreme Court.  But my hope is that the U.S. Supreme Court will do that.  If they don’t, the only other viable option out there is to support a constitutional amendment which I would, believing not just in marriage being defined as one man, one woman, but I also believe in states rights.  I believe that is an issue that appropriately belongs in the states.”  [Caffeinated Thoughts, 4/29/15]

Walker Supported Amending The Wisconsin Constitution To Ban Same-Sex Marriage

While In State House, Walker Voted For An Amendment That Banned Same-Sex Marriage. According to The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “Executive Scott Walker and former U.S. Rep. Mark Neumann — say they voted for the amendment that banned gay marriage and substantially similar relationships.” [Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 6/27/10]

Walker Supported A Proposed Amendment To The State Constitution To Ban Gay Marriage And Civil Unions. According to The Associated Press State & Local Wire, “Wisconsin voters will decide in November whether to amend the state constitution to ban gay marriage and civil unions after the proposal cleared its final hurdle in the Republican-controlled Legislature Tuesday evening. […] The two Republicans seeking their party’s nomination for governor U.S. Rep. Mark Green and Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker both support the ban.” [The Associated Press State & Local Wire, 3/1/06]

Walker Was Named As Defendant In Lawsuit Seeking To Overturn Gay Marriage Ban

Walker Named As Defendant In Lawsuit Challenging Wisconsin’s Ban On Gay Marriage. According to the Associated Press, “A group of same-sex couples filed a federal lawsuit Monday challenging Wisconsin’s ban on gay marriage, arguing the prohibition is unconstitutional and denies them civil rights married couples enjoy. […] The lawsuit names Gov. Scott Walker and Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, both Republicans, as defendants. A Walker spokesman didn’t immediately return a message.” [Associated Press, 2/4/14]

Walker Agreed With Appeal Of Decision Allowing Same-Sex Marriage

Walker Agreed With Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen’s Decision To Appeal Ruling Striking Down Wisconsin’s Gay Marriage Ban. According to WKOW, “Former Trek Bicycle Executive and Democratic Candidate for Governor Mary Burke released the following statement today, following Judge Crabb’s ruling on Wisconsin’s gay marriage ban. ‘Today is a great day for Wisconsin and committed couples who love each other across the state. Every loving couple should have the freedom to marry whomever they choose, and the fact that this freedom is now available in Wisconsin is something we all can and should be proud of.’ Friday night, Governor Scott Walker’s spokesperson Laurel Patrick sent this reaction statement: ‘It is correct for the Attorney General, on this or any other issue, to defend the constitution of the state of Wisconsin, especially in a case where the people voted to amend it.’” [WKOW, 6/6/14]

Marco Rubio

Rubio Said Gay Marriage Was A Sin, Had To Do With Values And Not Rights

Video: Rubio Said Homosexuality Was A Sin. While appearing at the Politico Playbook Breakfast, Rubio was asked, “Is homosexuality a sin? Marco: Well, I can tell you what faith teaches and faith teaches that it is. And that’s what the Bible teaches and that’s what faith teaches. But it also teaches that there are a bunch of other sins that are no less. For example, it teaches that lying is a sin. It teaches that disrespecting your parents is a sin. It teaches that stealing is a sin. It teaches that coveting your neighbor and what your neighbor has is a sin. So there isn’t a person in this room that isn’t guilty of sin. So, I don’t go around pointing fingers in that regard. I’m responsible for my salvation and I’m responsible for my family’s, and for inculcating in my family what our faith teaches, and they’ll become adults and decide how they want to apply that in life. As a policy maker, I could just tell you that I’m informed by my faith. And my faith informs me in who I am as a person — but not as a way to pass judgment on people.” [Politico Playbook Breakfast, 12/5/12]

2015: Rubio Rejected A Comparison Between Same-Sex Marriage And An Interracial Marriage Because One Was An Institution Versus An Individual’s Values. According to CNN, “He also rejected a comparison between same-sex marriage and interracial marriage. ‘That’s not the same thing,’ he said. ‘Because here you’re talking about the definition of an institution, not the value of a single human being. That’s the difference between the civil rights movement and the marriage equality movement.’” [CNN, 3/30/15]

Said Those Opposed Will Be Labeled Homophobes, Of Using Hate Speech

Rubio: “Real And Present Danger” That Supporters Of Marriage Equality Will Argue Mainstream Christianity As “Hate Speech.” According to CNN Wire, “Florida Sen. Marco Rubio took a decidedly conservative turn on same-sex marriage in an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network this week, warning that ‘there’s a real and present danger’ that gay marriage proponents will cast the teachings of mainstream Christianity as ‘hate speech.’” [CNN Wire, 5/27/15]

  • Rubio: “We’ve Reached The Point In Our Society Where If You Do Not Support Same-Sex Marriage, You Are Labeled A Homophobe And A Hater.”According to CNN Wire, “‘If you think about it, we are at the water’s edge of the argument that mainstream Christian teaching is hate speech. Because today we’ve reached the point in our society where if you do not support same-sex marriage, you are labeled a homophobe and a hater,’ the Republican presidential candidate said.” [CNN Wire, 5/27/15]
  • Rubio: Supporters Of Same-Sex Marriage Are “Going After Individuals,” Will Argue That The Teachings Of Mainstream Christianity Are “Hate Speech.”According to CNN Wire, “‘After they are done going after individuals, the next step is to argue that the teachings of mainstream Christianity, the catechism of the Catholic Church, is hate speech and there’s a real and present danger,’ Rubio warned.” [CNN Wire, 5/27/15]

According To Voter Guide, Rubio Supported A Federal Gay Marriage Ban

2010: Rubio Filled Out A Christian Coalition Candidate Survey Where He Said He Supported A Federal Marriage Amendment.  According to MSNBC, “But the Christian Coalition, a group that issues surveys to candidates and tracks their positions on a variety of issues, reported in their 2010 English and Spanish voter guides that Rubio supported a Federal Marriage Amendment. The guides are posted on the group’s website. The organization surveys candidates around the country and rates them, among other issues, on their specific stand on the issue of gay marriage. Reached by MSNBC for comment, a Christian Coalition spokeswoman confirmed that Rubio had filled out a candidate survey in 2010 when he was running for the Senate in Florida and attested to the voter guide’s accuracy, which she said was rigorously checked against candidate’s questionnaires, votes, and public statements. However, she said the group could not immediately produce a copy of Rubio’s survey without digging into their archives.” [MSNBC, 4/14/15]

  • Rubio’s Claim That He Never Supported A National Constitutional Amendment Banning Gay Marriage Was Noted As False By The Christian Coalition. According to MSNBC, “Sen. Marco Rubio told reporters on Tuesday that he has never supported a national constitutional amendment banning gay marriage despite his general opposition to such unions, preferring to leave the issue to the states. But a 2010 voter guide from a leading social conservative group indicates he supported such an amendment as recently as 2010 and a spokeswoman for the organization told MSNBC they stand by their account. ‘I’ve never supported a federal constitutional amendment on marriage,’ Rubio told MSNBC’s Kasie Hunt in an interview Tuesday. But the Christian Coalition, a group that issues surveys to candidates and tracks their positions on a variety of issues, reported in their 2010 English and Spanish voter guides that Rubio supported a Federal Marriage Amendment. The guides are posted on the group’s website. The organization surveys candidates around the country and rates them, among other issues, on their specific stand on the issue of gay marriage.” [MSNBC, 4/14/15]

Rubio:  “There Is No Federal Constitutional Right To Same Sex Marriage”  “David Brody:  Marriage in the Supreme Court, a big case coming this week to be argued. Where are you on this whole idea of a constitutional right that many people think — Marco Rubio: It doesn’t exist. There is no federal constitutional right to same sex marriage. There isn’t such a right. You have to really have a ridiculous reading of the U.S. Constitution to reach the conclusion that people have a right to marry someone of the same sex. There is no such constitutional right. “  [“Brody File,” CBN, 4/26/15]

Rubio:  “The Advocates Of Same Sex Marriage Refuse To Go Through The Legislatures Because They Can’t Win That Debate.” “Can a state decide to change their laws? Yes, but only through the political process, not through the court system.  And that’s what’s happening now.  The advocates of same sex marriage refuse to go through the legislatures because they can’t win that debate.  Thy don’t want to have a debate in society.  They want courts to impose it on people. And they’re not even satisfied with that.  They’ve now gone further.  They want to stigmatize, they want to ostracize anyone who disagrees with them as haters. It’s very simple. This is not a policy against anyone. I believe, as do a significant percentage of Americans, that the institution of marriage, an institution that existed before government, that existed before laws, that institution should remain in our laws recognized as the union of one man and one woman.” [“Brody File,” CBN, 4/26/15]

Jeb Bush

Bush Said Same Sex Marriage Debate Should Continue Even If Court Made Them Legal

Jeb Bush Said The Debate Over Same-Sex Marriage Should Continue “Irrespective Of What The Courts Say.” According to the New York Times, “Jeb Bush told a gathering of religious conservatives here on Friday that the debate over same-sex marriage should continue ‘irrespective of what the courts say,’ signaling that he would not consider a Supreme Court decision favorable to gay rights as the last word on the subject. Many in the Republican Party have hinted that they would rather the issue simply went away. And while they might prefer that the court not invalidate state laws limiting marriage to heterosexual couples, they would welcome a decision that settled the question once and for all. But with the court expected to rule before the end of the month on whether gay and lesbian couples have a constitutional right to marry, one of the looming questions for Mr. Bush and the other Republicans running for president is how aggressively they should respond to that ruling. In his comments to the Faith and Freedom Coalition’s Road to Majority Conference, Mr. Bush, the former governor of Florida, said he was not content to let the defense of traditional marriage fade away. ‘It’s got to be important over the long haul, irrespective of what the courts say,’ he said.” [New York Times, 6/9/15]

Jeb Bush: “Irrespective Of The Supreme Court Ruling Because They Are Going To Decide Whatever They Decide – I Don’t Know What They Are Going To Do – We Need To Be Stalwart Supporters Of Traditional Marriage.”According to Reuters, “Republican Jeb Bush said in a weekend radio interview that he does not believe the Constitution grants a right to gay marriage, emphasizing his support for ‘traditional marriage.’ The Supreme Court is expected by the end of June to make a landmark ruling that could make gay marriage the law of the land or return the decision to individual states. ‘It’s at the core of the Catholic faith and to imagine how we are going to succeed in our country unless we have committed family life, (a) committed child-centered family system, is hard to imagine,’ Bush told the Christian Broadcasting Network show, ‘The Brody File, in an interview broadcast on Sunday. ‘So, irrespective of the Supreme Court ruling because they are going to decide whatever they decide – I don’t know what they are going to do – we need to be stalwart supporters of traditional marriage,’ said Bush, who converted to Catholicism 20 years ago.” [Reuters, 5/18/15] 

2015: Bush Opposed Same Sex Marriage; Said It Should Be A State Decision 

When Asked If His Views Had Changed On Same-Sex Marriage, Jeb Bush Said “No. I Believe In Traditional Marriage.” According to the Washington Blade, “Despite a perception that he’s the most LGBT-friendly Republican in the field of potential presidential candidates, Jeb Bush said Friday he remains opposed to same-sex marriage. On stage at the second day of the 2015 Conservative Political Action Conference, Bush was asked if his views had changed on same-sex marriage by conservative commentator Sean Hannity. The former Florida governor was succinct in his reply: ‘No. I believe in traditional marriage.’” [Washington Blade, 2/27/15]

Jeb Bush: “It Ought Be A Local Decision. I Mean, A State Decision. The State Decided. The People Of The State Decided. But It’s Been Overturned By The Courts, I Guess.” According to the Miami Herald, “As he considers a presidential run, Jeb Bush is not offering encouraging words about same-sex marriages coming to his home state. ‘It ought be a local decision. I mean, a state decision,’ the former governor said Sunday in a brief interview. ‘The state decided. The people of the state decided. But it’s been overturned by the courts, I guess.’ His comments to the Miami Herald after a round of golf in Coral Gables tracked past statements by the Republican, who has said the gay-marriage question should be decided at the state level. But with Miami-Dade County ready to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples as early as Monday if a judge approves — and the rest of the state following on Tuesday — the historic change is bound to bring even more attention to Bush’s somewhat guarded take on gay rights.” [Miami Herald, 1/4/15]

Bush Had A Long History Of Anti-Gay Rights Positions

Jeb Bush: “I Think It Is A Slippery Slope That We’re On As We Expand The Notion Of Victimization Into Areas Beyond Which It Exists Today. I Don’t Think We Should Expand Or Create A Set Of Rights For Homosexuals.” According to the Miami Herald, “The Florida Supreme Court threw out the amendment, not because of its intent but because its specific wording didn’t pass legal muster. ‘I think it is a slippery slope that we’re on as we expand the notion of victimization into areas beyond which it exists today,’ Bush said. ‘I don’t think we should expand or create a set of rights for homosexuals.’” [Miami Herald, 6/17/94]

Jeb Bush: “I Do Not Believe That Government Should Create A New Class Of Citizens With Special Legal Rights.” According to an editorial by Jeb Bush and published by the Miami Herald, “However, I do not believe that government should create a new class of citizens with special legal rights. It is disingenuous of you to write that ‘the governor must stand up for and represent all the people of the Sunshine State on all matters.’” [Jeb Bush Editorial – Miami Herald, 6/22/94]

Jeb Bush: “You Imply That Discrimination Is Always Wrong, Yet Government And Individual Floridians Discriminate Every Day In Innumerable Ways. Government Discriminates Against Bank Robbers, Drug Dealers, Litterbugs, And Homeowners Who Repair Their Seawall Without A Permit, Just To Name A Few.” According to an editorial by Jeb Bush and published by the Miami Herald, “You imply that discrimination is always wrong, yet government and individual Floridians discriminate every day in innumerable ways. Government discriminates against bank robbers, drug dealers, litterbugs, and homeowners who repair their seawall without a permit, just to name a few. Yours is not a reasoned argument reflecting reality.” [Jeb Bush Editorial – Miami Herald, 6/22/94]

Jeb Bush: “The Governor — And The Government — Do Not Defend The Conduct Of Every Floridian With Equal Verve And Enthusiasm. Polluters, Pedophiles, Pornographers, Drunk Drivers, And Developers Without Proper Permits Receive — And Deserve — Precious Little Representation Or Defense From Their Governor.” According to an editorial by Jeb Bush and published by the Miami Herald, “The governor — and the government — do not defend the conduct of every Floridian with equal verve and enthusiasm. Polluters, pedophiles, pornographers, drunk drivers, and developers without proper permits receive — and deserve — precious little representation or defense from their governor. The statement that the governor must stand up for all people on all matters is just silly.” [Jeb Bush Editorial – Miami Herald, 6/22/94]

Jeb Bush: “Should Sodomy Be Elevated To The Same Constitutional Status As Race And Religion? My Answer Is No. We Have Enough Special Categories, Enough Victims, Without Creating Even More.” According to an editorial by Jeb Bush and published by the Miami Herald, “The public policy question is whether homosexuals deserve special legal protection from otherwise legal, private acts of discrimination, which protections are not available to smokers, drinkers, children, redheads, Midwesterners, Democrats, veterans, nudists, etc. Or, to put it another way, should sodomy be elevated to the same constitutional status as race and religion? My answer is No. We have enough special categories, enough victims, without creating even more.” [Jeb Bush Editorial – Miami Herald, 6/22/94]

Jeb Bush: “I Don’t Believe We Should Create Special Laws And Create Another Class Of Victims.” According to the Palm Beach Post, “When a 28-year-old man who has the AIDS virus stops him outside a television station to ask him about gay rights, Bush puts his hand on the man’s shoulder, moves in close, speaks earnestly but doesn’t budge from his position. ‘I don’t believe we should create special laws and create another class of victims.’” [Palm Beach Post, 8/22/94]

Jeb Bush: “I Support Equal Rights For All Floridians, But Not Special Rights Based On Sexual Orientation.” According to the Orlando Sentinel, “JEB BUSH: I support equal rights for all Floridians, but not special rights based on sexual orientation.” [Orlando Sentinel, 10/30/94]

Jeb Bush: “I Would Like To Be Able To Get To A Point Where You Don’t Have To Talk About Someone’s Sexual Preference For Them To Be Able To Make A Contribution.” According to the Miami Herald, “Lawrence also pushed the pair to discuss how homosexuality fit into their definitions of diversity. MacKay said gays and lesbians must be made to feel that they have access to the ‘ruling powers in their communities.’ ‘In many instances, we should be able to be different from others, yet be loved by them,’ he said. Bush showed no patience for those who would use sexual orientation as a barrier to inclusion: ‘I would like to be able to get to a point where you don’t have to talk about someone’s sexual preference for them to be able to make a contribution,’ he said.” [Miami Herald, 1/17/98]

Jeb Bush Said He Does Not “Place Sexual Orientation In The Same Classification As Race Or Disability” And That He Does Not “Favor Extending Special Rights To Florida’s Nonheterosexuals.” According to the Miami Herald, “Bush added that he doesn’t ‘place sexual orientation in the same classification as race or disability’ and that he doesn’t ‘favor extending special rights to Florida’s nonheterosexuals,’ Eddy says.” [Miami Herald, 7/2/98]

Jeb Bush Described The Gay Rights Movement As A “Modern Victims Movement.” According to BuzzFeed, “In his 1995 book, Profiles in Character, Bush described the ‘gay rights movement,’ ‘feminist movement,’ and ‘black empowerment movement’ as ‘modern victim movements.’ These activists, he wrote, ‘have attempted to get people to view themselves as part of a smaller group deserving of something from society.’” [BuzzFeed, 1/5/15]

Rand Paul

“Moral Crisis”

March 2015: Paul Argued That Same-Sex Marriage Was A “Moral Crisis” That Required A “Great Awakening With Tent Revivals” To Reform

Paul Told Evangelicals That America Had A “Moral Crisis That Allows People To Think There Would Be Some Sort Of Other Marriage.” According to the Daily Beast, “At a prayer breakfast in Washington, D.C. on Thursday morning, Rand Paul practiced pandering. […] He conceded to the evangelical crowd, which included Dr. Jerry Johnson, CEO of the National Religious Broadcasters, that there is a ‘moral crisis in our country’ and more specifically, ‘a moral crisis that allows people to think that there would be some sort of other marriage’ in addition to heterosexual, or ‘traditional,’ marriage.” [Daily Beast, 3/28/15]

Paul Said Same-Sex Marriage Was A “Moral Crisis” That Required “Another Great Awakening With Tent Revivals” To Reform. According to Buzzfeed, “This is not the only time Paul has commented on gay rights — not that he would call them that. Earlier in March, he said same-sex marriage ‘offends myself and a lot of people.’ And last week, Paul argued same-sex marriage results from a ‘moral crisis’ that will require ‘another Great Awakening with tent revivals of thousands of people saying, ‘reform or see what’s going to happen if we don’t reform.’” [Buzzfeed, 3/31/15]

March 2015: Paul Was “Offended By The Use Of Marriage To Describe Same-Sex Unions”

Paul Said He Was “Offended By The Use Of Marriage To Describe Same-Sex Unions.” According to the International Business Times, “Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, a potential 2016 presidential candidate, said he is offended by the use of marriage to describe same-sex unions in an interview on Fox News. The Republican said he prefers ‘traditional’ marriage between a man and a woman. ‘Ultimately, we could have fixed this a long time ago if we just allowed contracts between adults. We didn’t have to call it marriage, which offends myself and a lot of people,’ Paul said in the Friday interview. ‘I think having competing contracts that would give them equivalency before the law would have solved a lot of these problems, and it may be where we’re still headed.’” [International Business Times, 3/8/15]

Kentucky’s Same-Sex Marriage Ban

February 2015: Paul Was Critical Of A Court Ruling That Overturned Kentucky’s Same-Sex Marriage Ban

Paul Criticized Federal Court Ruling Overturning Kentucky’s Same-Sex Marriage Ban. According to Reason, “Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has responded to Reason’s request for comment on a judge recently ordering Kentucky to recognize out of state same-sex marriages. Statement below: ‘I believe in the historic and religious definition of marriage.  I also believe this power belongs to the states and the people, not the federal government.  It is illegitimate for the federal courts to intrude here.’” [Reason, 2/28/14]

Chris Christie

Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage

2013: Video: Christie Said That Marriage Was Between A Man And A Woman. At a town hall in Vernon, Chris Christie said, “QUESTIONER: And it comes with the great benefit of equal rights for all people under the law seeking gay marriage. Will you please address this issue? CHRISTIE: Sure, I think this is an issue I’ve been real clear on since I ran in 2009, I believe, what I believed before and still believe today, that the institution of marriage is between one man and one woman.” [Chris Christie, Vernon Town Hall, 6/28/13]

October 2013: Christie Said He Would Not Change His Mind On Same-Sex Marriage Even If One Of His Children Was Gay. According to the Newark Star-Ledger, ‘Christie and Buono also clashed on marriage equality. Asked how he would react if any of his children told him they were gay, Christie maintained his opposition to legalizing same-sex marriage. ‘If my children came to me and said they were gay I would grab them and hug them and tell them I love them,’ Christie said. ‘I would also tell them that your dad believes that marriage is between one man and one woman.’’ [Newark Star-Ledger 10/16/13]

May 2012: Christie Said His Position On Same-Sex Marriage Was ‘Not Going To Change.’ According to the Newark Star-Ledger, ‘Gov. Chris Christie said yesterday that he was not budging in his opposition to same-sex marriage, a day after President Obama’s stunning announcement that he supported them. ‘My position is really clear on it,’ Christie told a town hall audience in Franklin Township, Somerset County. ‘It’s not going to change. I just do not believe that marriage should be between anyone but a man and a woman.’’ [Newark Star-Ledger, 5/11/12]

2015: Christie Said He “Certainly” Will Keep Fighting Against Same-Sex Marriage

July 2015: Christie Said He “Certainly” Was Not Going To Stop Fighting Against Same-Sex Marriage Because It Was Something He Felt “Strongly About.” According to Time, “New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said Saturday that while same-sex marriage is ‘settled’ in New Jersey, it’s not time for opponents to give up the fight. Speaking to reporters at the National Governors Association, Christie said it is not time for Republicans to drop the issue, which is entrenched in the party’s platform but contributes to the party’s difficulty with younger voters. ‘I don’t think that there’s going to be some major referee who’s going to say now it’s time to stop,’ he said, referencing his own opposition to the unions. ‘Certainly I’m not going to, because these are opinions that I feel strongly about.’” [Time, 7/12/15]

July 2015: Christie Said Despite The Fact That Same-Sex Marriage Had Been “Settled In New Jersey,” Opponents Should Continue To “Fight” Same-Sex Marriage Elsewhere. According to Time, “New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said Saturday that while same-sex marriage is ‘settled’ in New Jersey, it’s not time for opponents to give up the fight.” [Time, 7/12/15]

Christie: “Not Time” To Drop Fight Against Same-Sex Marriage

July 2015: Christie Said It Was “Not Time For Republicans To Drop” Their Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage. According to Time, “New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said Saturday that while same-sex marriage is ‘settled’ in New Jersey, it’s not time for opponents to give up the fight. Speaking to reporters at the National Governors Association, Christie said it is not time for Republicans to drop the issue, which is entrenched in the party’s platform but contributes to the party’s difficulty with younger voters.” [Time, 7/12/15]

July 2015: Christie Said The Fight Against Same-Sex Marriage Should Be “Done State By State.” According to Time, “Christie, seen as an all-but-certain candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, said the party should not attempt a national campaign on the issue. ‘It should be done state by state,’ he said. Nineteen states and the District of Columbia allow same-sex marriages, with most states’ legal bans currently under challenge in federal courts across the country.” [Time, 7/12/15]

New Jersey’s Same-Sex Marriage Ban

2012: Christie Vetoed A Bill To Legalize Same-Sex Marriage

February 2012: Christie Vetoed Same-Sex Marriage Bill. According to the Asbury Park Press, ‘Same-sex marriage proponents were dealt a setback Friday, though not an unexpected one, when Gov. Chris Christie vetoed a bill that would let gay couples marry. Roughly six hours after the bill arrived at his desk, Christie issued a conditional veto, asking lawmakers to instead ‘create a strong ombudsman for civil unions to carry on New Jersey’s strong tradition of tolerance and fairness.’ The Republican governor had long promised a veto. He said changes to the marriage law should be done only if approved by voters through a statewide vote, not through an act by lawmakers.’ [Asbury Park Press, 2/17/12]

2013: Christie Appealed The New Jersey State Supreme Court Ruling Allowing Same-Sex Marriage

2013: The New Jersey State Supreme Court Ruled That Same-Sex Couples Could Get Married. According to Talking Points Memo, ‘New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) has ordered his administration to withdraw its appeal of a New Jersey Supreme court ruling allowing gay couples to get married. The New Jersey high court on Friday refused a request by the Christie administration to delay a ruling by a judge that allowed same-sex couples to get married in New Jersey. After the ruling the Christie administration said it would appeal the decision. Couples in New Jersey began getting married early Monday within minutes of New Jersey, becoming the 13th state (plus the District of Columbia) to allow same-sex marriage.’ [Talking Points Memo, 10/21/13]

2013: Christie Appealed The State Supreme Court Ruling On Same-Sex Marriage. According to Talking Points Memo, ‘New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) has ordered his administration to withdraw its appeal of a New Jersey Supreme court ruling allowing gay couples to get married. The New Jersey high court on Friday refused a request by the Christie administration to delay a ruling by a judge that allowed same-sex couples to get married in New Jersey. After the ruling the Christie administration said it would appeal the decision. Couples in New Jersey began getting married early Monday within minutes of New Jersey, becoming the 13th state (plus the District of Columbia) to allow same-sex marriage.’ [Talking Points Memo, 10/21/13]

2013: Christie Dropped His Appeal Of The Same-Sex Marriage Ruling On The Same Day That New Jersey Became The 13th State To Recognize Same-Sex Marriage. According to Talking Points Memo, ‘New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) has ordered his administration to withdraw its appeal of a New Jersey Supreme court ruling allowing gay couples to get married. The New Jersey high court on Friday refused a request by the Christie administration to delay a ruling by a judge that allowed same-sex couples to get married in New Jersey. After the ruling the Christie administration said it would appeal the decision. Couples in New Jersey began getting married early Monday within minutes of New Jersey, becoming the 13th state (plus the District of Columbia) to allow same-sex marriage.’ [Talking Points Memo, 10/21/13]

Ted Cruz

Cruz: The Union Of A Man And A Woman Has Been The Fundamental Building Block Of Society For Millennia And The Judeo-Christian Value Of Traditional Marriage Is The Cornerstone Of Our Nation. According to a press release obtained via TedCruz.Org, “‘For millennia, the union of a man and a woman has been the fundamental building block of society, and the Judeo Christian value of traditional marriage is a cornerstone upon which the strength of our Nation rests. Before 2004, no U.S. state recognized same sex marriages” [TedCruz.Org, 4/28/15]

Cruz Released A Statement After The Supreme Court Heard Oral Arguments On Gay Marriage Criticizing Federal Judges For Defying The “Power Of The People To Define Marriage Through Their Elected Representatives As A Covenant Between One Man And One Woman.” According to a  press release obtained via TedCruz.Org, “U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R Texas, today released the following statement regarding today’s oral arguments in the Supreme Court concerning whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to license marriages between two people of the same sex and to recognize same sex marriages licensed and performed in another state: ‘In recent years, federal judges have defied the power of the people to define marriage through their elected representatives as a covenant between one man and one woman. At the behest of those seeking to use unelected judges to strike down democratically enacted marriage laws, courts across the country have seized for themselves the authority to redefine marriage. Today the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in cases raising the question of whether such judicial intrusion is constitutionally proper. It is not.” [TedCruz.Org, 4/28/15]

April 2015: Cruz Filed Two Bills To Protect States That Barred Gay Couples From Marrying And Would Establish Amendments Shielding States That Defined Marriage As Between One Man And Woman From Legal Action. According to Houston Chronicle, “Days before the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments on same sex marriage, Sen. Ted Cruz has filed two bills to protect states that bar gay couples from marrying. Cruz’s legislation would establish a constitutional amendment shielding states that define marriage as between one woman and one man from legal action, according to bill language obtained by Bloomberg News.” [Houston Chronicle, 4/25/15] 

Cruz Sent A Letter To Christian Pastors Asking Them To Stand With God And Pray On April 28 When The Supreme Court Heard A Case That Would Decide Whether The Constitution Allowed Gay Couples The Right To Marry. In a Christian Broadcasting Network blog David Brody wrote, “GOP Presidential candidate Ted Cruz is sending a letter to tens of thousand of pastors asking them sand with God and pray during the two hour time frame on April 28 when the Supreme Court hears a landmark same sex marriage case. The justices will decide whether the Constitution allows homosexual couples the right to marry no matter where they reside or whether states have the right to say marriage is only between a man and a woman.” [Christian Broadcasting Network, 4/16/15]

Cruz Called On His Supporters To “Simply Pray” That LGBT Americans Were Not Allowed To Have Equal Rights Because The Thought Of Same-Sex Marriage Was “Heartbreaking.” According to Raw Story, “Tea party-backed Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R) this week called on his supporters to ‘simply pray’ that LGBT Americans were not allowed to have equal rights because the thought of same-sex marriage was ‘heartbreaking.’ In an interview on Monday, conservative radio host Janet Mefferd asked Cruz why he felt the need to introduce the ‘State Marriage Defense Act’ in an effort to undo the Supreme Court’s decision striking down parts of the federal government’s ban on marriage equality.” [Raw Story, 2/18/14]

Cruz:  The “Democratic Party Has Become So Radicalized In Their Devotion To Mandatory Gay Marriage In All 50 States That There Is No Longer Any Room For Religious Liberty.” “What a sad statement, that today’s modern Democratic Party has become so radicalized in their devotion to mandatory gay marriage in all 50 states that there is no longer any room for religious liberty.”  [Ted Cruz, Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition Presidential Forum, Waukee, IA, 4/25/15; American Bridge Tracking Footage]

Cruz:  “Imagine A Federal Government That Works To Defend The Sanctity Of Human Life And To Uphold The Sacrament Of Marriage.”  [Ted Cruz Presidential Announcement Speech, Lynchburg, VA, 3/23/15; American Bridge Tracking Footage]

Ben Carson

Carson, 2015: Being Gay “Absolutely” A Choice Because People “Go Into Prison Straight — And When They Come Out, They’re Gay.” According to CNN, “During the interview Wednesday morning, when Carson was asked by Chris Cuomo whether being gay is a choice, he replied: ‘Absolutely.’ ‘Because a lot of people who go into prison go into prison straight — and when they come out, they’re gay. So, did something happen while they were in there? Ask yourself that question,’ Carson said.” [CNN, 3/5/15]

Carson, 2015: “No Group, Be They Gays, Be They NAMBLA, Be They People Who Believe In Bestiality” Can Change Definition Of Marriage. In an interview with Sean Hannity, Ben Carson said, “Well, my thoughts are that marriage is between a man and a woman. It’s a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality. It doesn’t matter what they are. They don’t get to change the definition. So he, it’s not something that is against gays, it’s against anybody who wants to come along and change the fundamental definitions of pillars of society. It has significant ramifications.” [Slate, 3/28/15]

In 2014, Ben Carson Claimed “Neo-Marxist” Attacks On “Strong Families” Was Strategy To Eliminate United States, Establish New World Order: “This Stuff Is Not Secret. You Can Read About It.” During his keynote address for the National Organization for Marriage’s March for Marriage, Ben Carson said, “If you look in a lot of the writings of the neo-Marxists, when they talk about the New World Order, they say there’s only one stick-in-the-mud: the United States. How do you get them out of the way, or how do you change them? And they said there were two fundamental things: their Judeo-Christian faith and their strong families. Those were the things that had to be attacked, and those things have been systematically attacked over the last several decades. There’s a book called The Naked Communist by Cleon Skousen, the same guy that wrote The Five Thousand Year Leap. He lays out the whole agenda of how to attack the family and the Judeo-Christian values. To weaken the structure of America. This stuff is not secret. You can read about it.” [Right Wing Watch, 6/27/14]

Carson’s 2012 Book: Gay Marriage “A Slippery Slope With A Disastrous Ending, As Witnessed In The Dramatic Fall Of The Roman Empire.” In his book “America the Beautiful: Rediscovering What Made This Nation Great,” Ben Carson wrote, “As a Bible-believing Christian, you might imagine that I would not be a proponent of gay marriage. I believe God loves homosexuals as much as he loves everyone, but if we can redefine marriage as between two men or two women or any other way based on social pressures as opposed to between a man and a woman, we will continue to redefine it in any way that we wish, which is a slippery slope with a disastrous ending, as witnessed in the dramatic fall of the Roman Empire. I don’t believe this to be a political view, but rather a logical and reasoned view with long-term benefits to family structure and the propagation of humankind.” [Media Matters, 3/29/13]

Carson, 2014: “I Liken The Gay Marriage Crowd To A New Group Of Mathematicians Who Say, “Two Plus Two Is Five.’” [Right Wing Watch, 6/27/14]

Rick Santorum

Rick Santorum, 2011: “We Can’t Have A Constitutional Right To Consensual Sexual Activity No Matter What It Is.” In a radio interview with Bardlee Dean, Rick Santorum said, “I stood up from the very beginning back in 2003 when the Supreme Court was going to create a constitutional right to sodomy and said this is wrong. We can’t do this. We can’t have a constitutional right to consensual sexual activity no matter what it is.” [ThinkProgress, 10/25/11]

Santorum, 2013: Accepting Gays Would Be “The Murder Weapon” For Boy Scouts Of America. In an op-ed for World News Daily, Rick Santorum wrote, “So when I saw that the Boy Scouts of America executive board is convening on Wednesday to discuss abandoning the organization’s founding moral principles that nurture boys into men, I was saddened, but not surprised. It makes sense that men at the top of the food chain whose boys are insulated, although not immune, from the harmful effects of societal change are behind this effort. Board members James Turley, CEO of Ernst & Young, and Randall Stephenson, CEO of AT&T, are advocating for gay scoutmasters and scouts. They are joined by two big funders, UPS and Merck, that have signaled change or money will disappear. […] Scouting may not survive this transformation of American society, but for the sake of the average boy in America, I hope the board of the Scouts doesn’t have its fingerprints on the murder weapon.” [World News Daily, 2/3/13]

Rick Santorum, 2013: Contemplating Tolerance For Gay Marriage “Is The Destruction Of Our Republic.” At the Midwest Republican Leadership Conference, Rick Santorum said, “That [the Supreme Court’s DOMA decision] means you are irrational, you have no reason, to oppose this form of marriage, unless – and he [Justice Kennedy] says this – the only reason you would do so is because you hate people who are gay and lesbian. That’s what he said. […] But to go and change the foundation and say that, because we hold these views, we are now the haters and we are not going to be tolerated, changes everything. And so for the Republican Party to even contemplate going along with this is the destruction of our republic.” [Right Wing Watch, 10/17/13]

Rick Santorum, 2011: One Consequence Of Same-Sex Marriage Would Be That Schools Would Teach About It. According to ABC News, “Santorum then said that if same sex marriage was legalized then ‘their sexual activity’ would be seen as ‘equal’ to heterosexual relationships and it would be taught in schools. ‘Really- wow- um okay, well let’s see if we can have a discussion. We can flesh out some, well, let’s look at what’s going to be taught in our schools because now we have same sex couples being the same and their sexual activity being seen as equal and being affirmed by society as heterosexual couples and their activity,’ Santorum said. ‘So what is going to be taught to our people in health class in our schools? What is going to be taught to our children about who in our stories, even to little children – what are married couples? What families look like in America? So, you are going to have in our curriculum spread throughout our curriculum worldview that is fundamentally different than what is taught in schools today? Is that not a consequence of gay marriage?’ he GOP hopeful asked.”  [ABC News, 12/6/11]

Rick Santorum, 2005: Same-Sex Marriage “Threatens My Marriage. It Threatens All Marriages.” According to an interview with The New York Times Magazine, “When I asked him if he viewed gay marriage as a threat to his own marriage, he answered quickly. ‘Yes, absolutely,’ he said. ‘It threatens my marriage. It threatens all marriages. It threatens the traditional values of this country.’” [New York Times Magazine, 5/22/05]

Rick Santorum, 2003: “In Every Society, The Definition Of Marriage Has Not Ever To My Knowledge Included Homosexuality. That’s Not To Pick On Homosexuality. It’s Not, You Know, Man On Child, Man On Dog, Or Whatever The Case May Be.” In an interview with the Associated Press, Rick Santorum said, “Every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. Why? Because society is based on one thing: that society is based on the future of the society. And that’s what? Children. Monogamous relationships. In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing.” [Associated Press, 4/23/03]

Published: Jun 26, 2015

Jump to Content