Marco Rubio: I 'Disagree' With Same-Sex Marriage Ruling, But It's 'Law'
Source: TPM
-snip-
Read Rubio's full statement below:
I believe that marriage, as the key to strong family life, is the most important institution in our society and should be between one man and one woman. People who disagree with the traditional definition of marriage have the right to change their state laws. That is the right of our people, not the right of the unelected judges or justices of the Supreme Court. This decision short-circuits the political process that has been underway on the state level for years.
While I disagree with this decision, we live in a republic and must abide by the law. As we look ahead, it must be a priority of the next president to nominate judges and justices committed to applying the Constitution as written and originally understood.
The next president and all in public office must strive to protect the First Amendment rights of religious institutions and millions of Americans whose faiths hold a traditional view of marriage. This is a constitutional duty, not a political opinion. Our nation was founded on the human right of religious freedom, and our elected leaders have a duty to protect that right by ensuring that no one is compelled by law to violate their conscience.
I firmly believe the question of same sex marriage is a question of the definition of an institution, not the dignity of a human being. Every American has the right to pursue happiness as they see fit. Not every American has to agree on every issue, but all of us do have to share our country. A large number of Americans will continue to believe in traditional marriage, and a large number of Americans will be pleased with the Courts decision today. In the years ahead, it is my hope that each side will respect the dignity of the other.
Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/marco-rubio-scotus-same-sex-marriage
durablend
(7,464 posts)A seat opens up on the clown bus...
emulatorloo
(44,182 posts)Although Limbag will probably force him to recant
frylock
(34,825 posts)Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)yuiyoshida
(41,861 posts)Robbins
(5,066 posts)who is trying to play both sides instead of being just anti-gay.
Liberalagogo
(1,770 posts)"... it must be a priority of the next president to nominate judges and justices committed to applying the Constitution as written and originally understood."
Which is what 5 out of 9 of them did this time. Stop whining you pathetic douchebag.
bucolic_frolic
(43,282 posts)he's on both sides of the issue, for and against, now and in the future.
It's all about boundaries. Live and let live. Secular state and private religious
institutions. GOPs been trying to blend all that for 35 years.
amuse bouche
(3,657 posts)So why does he still say he will get rid of it? Why does he not honor that ruling from the same court?
What a clown hypocrite
d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)Otherwise he'll be left with just his bottle of drinking water.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)SpartanDem
(4,533 posts)The "Well... I don't like, but let's just move on.." stuff isn't be good enough for the
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)So, about par for the course. I'd respect him more if he could just be honest about his hate, or lack thereof. At least Huckabee is an unabashed douchebag. Trump makes no pretense at being a decent human being. They're loathsome, but you know where you stand with them.
LibertyLover
(4,788 posts)don't get that the pastors of their favorite flavor of God Bothering aren't going to have to perform a same sex marriage ceremonies if that denomination or the pastors don't recognize their validity? Jeez louise guys - grow up.
TBF
(32,090 posts)ok, Rubio, you find me one and I'll do my best to remain open-minded.