GOP Candidates On Same-Sex Marriage

Jim Burroway

August 12th, 2011

Think Progress has a handy compilation clip from Thursday night’s GOP debate in Iowa of candidates discussing same-sex marriage. One of my favorite reactions comes from across the Pond, with The Guardian’s Richard Adams responding to Romney’s argument that “marriage is a status“:

Looking back through some clips, there’s Romney saying: “Marriage is a status, it’s not an activity.” Who says romance is dead, eh? Calling marriage a “status” makes it sound like a Facebook update.

The emerging consensus, albeit a snarky one,  is that the debate’s real winner was Rick Perry, who doesn’t officially declare his candidacy until tomorrow.

Here’s the clip and transcript.

Mitt Romney: Marriage should be decided at the federal level. … Marriage is a status. It’s not an activity that goes on within the walls of a state and as a result, our marriage status relationship should be constant across the country. I believe we should have a federal amendment to the Constitution that defines marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman because I believe the ideal place to raise a child is in a home with a mom and a dad.

Jon Huntsman: I also believe in civil unions, because I think this nation can do a better job when it comes to equality. And I think this nation can do a better job when it comes to reciprocal beneficiary rights rights. And I believe that this is something that ought to be discussed among the various states. I don’t have any problem with the states having this discussion. But as for me, I support civil unions.

Ron Paul: (About whether polygamy would “be okay too”) It’s sort of like asking the question if the states wanted to legalize slavery or something like that, that is so past reality that no state is going to do that. But on the issue of marriage, I think marriage should be between a single man and a single woman and that the federal government shouldn’t be involved. I want less government involvement. I don’t want the federal government having a marriage police.

Rick Santorum: It sounds to me like Rep. Paul would actually say polygamous marriages are okay. If the state has the right to do it, they have the right to do it.

Michele Bachmann: I support the Federal Marriage Amendment because I believe that we will see this issue at the Supreme Court someday, and as president I would not nominate activist judges who legislate from the bench. I also want to say that when I was in Minnesota, I was the chief author of the Constitutional amendment to define marriage as one-man, one-woman. I have an absolutely unblemished record when it comes to this issue of man-woman marriage.


August 12th, 2011

Ron Paul: “I think marriage should be between a single man and a single woman”

I assume he wanted to say “between one man and one woman” but his statement can also be interpreted as “I think marriage should be between an unmarried male and an unmarried female”!


August 12th, 2011

Paul’s stance on marriage is so unbelievably irritating. Marriage is a legal status. If it weren’t, there’d be no point in getting married. How you take the government out of a legal status is beyond me.


August 12th, 2011

So therefore all single parents will be forced to give up their children. To be paid for and cared for by these “family values” freaks.


August 12th, 2011

Yet more evidence that Ron Paul is an opportunistic cafeteria Libertarian at best.


August 12th, 2011

Marriage is complex because it involves human beings. Marriage is all these things: a status; a legal contract between two persons involving a collection of rights and responsibilities; an arrangement for caring for each other; a framework for having sex in a way that society approves; an arrangement for having and raising children; a spiritual and emotional covenant between people who want to share their lives.

Marriage is all these things and because it is all these things simultaneously, it is too complex for any one authority — government, religion, cultural — to cover all these aspects with laws, regulations, or expectations.


August 12th, 2011

Mitt Romney actually gave the clearest answer. He wants to federalize marriage, one national law that applies to everyone. Traditionally, (and I use that word intentionally), marriage in America is a matter for the states. So I guess this means Mr. Romney opposes traditional marriage.


August 12th, 2011

@Revchicoucc: I don’t buy your logic, unless I misunderstood your point. Yes there are separate aspects of marriage such as the legal, the private, and the religious/cultural. That is no good reason why laws can’t be made to spell out the legal aspect, churches can’t separately decide their own doctrines on the matter, and married individuals can’t decide how the private aspects will go simultaneously. Arguments that marriage shouldn’t be a government matter are ridiculous and never hold water. I can buy that marriage licenses should be issued by individual states, but the federal government already has such as thing as full faith and credit and a demand for equal protection written right there in the Constitution. To let states deny full faith and credit for marriage licenses issued in other states and to discriminate by not offering marriage licenses for same-sex couples is a violation of equal protection.


August 12th, 2011

You’re expecting a group of Republicans to make sense. This is a common erroneous expectation.

Mark F.

August 12th, 2011

Congressman Paul said he thought the federal government shouldn’t be involved in defining marriage. He is on record against the Federal Marriage Amendment.


August 14th, 2011

@ Mark, yes he is against federal government deciding marriage, but he has also said government ought to get out of the marriage business altogether. Maybe I’m misinterpreting, but that to me means, state governments as well. In fact I think I remember him saying it should be private and issued by churches. That I have a huge problem with, because it serves no practical real world purpose, and if that happens an employer, lawyer, hospital, insurance company, etc can just scoff at any marriage they claim to “disagree with.” He also said he believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. That does not offer support to the freedom to let LGBT people have recognized families. He is against the wars, which I like, and he speaks out against the seemingly limitless power of corporations. As for social issues though, I disagree strongly of course and his stance on marriage is a cowardly cop-out.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.


Latest Posts

The Things You Learn from the Internet

"The Intel On This Wasn't 100 Percent"

From Fake News To Real Bullets: This Is The New Normal

NC Gov McCrory Throws In The Towel

Colorado Store Manager Verbally Attacks "Faggot That Voted For Hillary" In Front of 4-Year-Old Son

Associated Press Updates "Alt-Right" Usage Guide

A Challenge for Blue Bubble Democrats

Baptist Churches in Dallas, Austin Expelled Over LGBT-Affirming Stance

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.