Gay Marriage | News | Rufus Wainwright

Rufus Wainwright on Marriage Equality

RufuswainwrightFrom an interview in the New York Press:

"Oddly enough, I’m actually not a huge gay marriage supporter. I personally don’t want to get married but I think that any law or amendment to the constitution that deals with sex and love should just be banned in general. I don’t think any government should encroach on what goes on in the bedroom at all. Frankly, if you want to marry a dog, why don’t you go ahead and marry a dog, I don’t care. I’m a complete libertarian and so I really disagree with it."

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Thanks Rufus, but stick to music, stupid

    Posted by: B-rod | Dec 8, 2008 5:26:36 PM

  2. thanks, Rufus.

    this is why we should not pay attention to what celebrities think.

    Posted by: le_sacre | Dec 8, 2008 5:26:54 PM

  3. I am not sure what is more annoying. The fact that a reporter thought that Rufus Wainwright's opinion on marriage equality matters or that Wainwright thinks he is a libertarian. Do you advocate for no Federal government Rufus? Ignorant.

    Posted by: DanInSeattle | Dec 8, 2008 5:31:52 PM

  4. Oh, Rufus...

    Posted by: David D. | Dec 8, 2008 5:34:46 PM

  5. libertarian = uncaring

    Posted by: David | Dec 8, 2008 5:37:25 PM

  6. Thank you for including this perspective. I find it troubling that the government is in practice championing couple-hood with special rights. Neither do I take issue with monogamy itself, just the privileged status that couples get in our culture (in most cultures).

    Anyway, it is nice to see a different side.

    Posted by: Green Crayon | Dec 8, 2008 5:38:39 PM

  7. I think that a lot of people who call themselves "libertarians" are just lazy. It's so easy to take this type of position, and it kind of sounds OK initially (at least to some people); but it falls apart when you scratch the surface.

    Posted by: darbnyc | Dec 8, 2008 5:38:46 PM

  8. Gotta side with Rufus on this one. We are in this mess because the government insisted in getting involved with marriages. The government should stay out of people's personal lives and enforce equality for all adults over 18--pure and simple. In the meantime, marriage equality is a top priority and Rufus is advocating that. And, marriage equality includes the right not to get married, of course.

    Posted by: henry | Dec 8, 2008 5:39:11 PM

  9. The meth he was smoking prior to his stint in rehab must have addled his brain.

    Posted by: peterparker | Dec 8, 2008 5:46:48 PM

  10. Someone should take Judy Garland's ruby slipper and beat him with it.

    Posted by: Dan B | Dec 8, 2008 5:51:15 PM

  11. I just love Rufus Wainwright and his whole family, but it has never occurred to me to care what he thinks about such matters.

    Like Rufus, I don't care about getting married, but unlike him, I think legalizing same-sex marriage has to happen if we are to be granted full civil rights as gay Americans.

    Rufus may not be very enlightened about political/cultural matters, but he is an amazing musical artist touched by genius.

    Posted by: Stewart | Dec 8, 2008 5:52:08 PM

  12. Out of context, this quotation is misleading.

    After Rufus talked about participating in H&M’s “Fashion Against AIDS” campaign, the interviewer asked, "How do you react when activism is nullified, like when the same-sex marriage law was reversed in California?"

    So he's saying that while he's not a big marriage supporter, he's against any kind of amendment about love. I. e. he was against Prop 8. What he disagrees with is legislating to make marriage illegal.

    Green Crayon: absolutely right. The US does more than almost any other civilized nation to force people into marriage. It would be nice if that could change, but in the mean time we may as well get marriage equality.

    Posted by: Kevinvt | Dec 8, 2008 5:57:45 PM

  13. If govt. is not involved in marriage, you would need to draft the contract yourselves, but only you would be bound to it, not any third parties. Govt. enables people to enforce their marriages on others. Libertarians would not argue for his position, either. His is actually a far-left-wing form of anarchy or free-love sentiment.

    Posted by: anon | Dec 8, 2008 5:57:55 PM

  14. If you can find a dog that can read a marriage contract, understand it and sign it perhaps you should marry that dog. It's obviously very special.

    Posted by: Jason | Dec 8, 2008 6:03:00 PM

  15. Neither Rufus nor many Gay people understand that once the Government gets involved in anything, it takes an ACT OF GOD NOT MAN to get the government out. Rufus shows his total ignorance of Marriage Law and its function. Marriage Law has nothing to do with Sex and Love, which Rufus and many Gay people seem to think it does. Marriage has nothing to do with activity or lack there of in the bedroom. It has everything to do with property and the welfare of children until 18yrs old. Because marriage is a legal contract between two people the government has to have some involvement to make sure the terms of the contract are adhered to. Would Rufus like the government to get out of involvement with other contracts too, why just this one contract? Who would make sure the terms are adhered to?

    Posted by: Sargon Bighorn | Dec 8, 2008 6:03:59 PM

  16. "Now copyright law - THAT'S really an area where the government should be exercising its full powers - I mean, how's a girl to make a living in this economic climate?" twiddle dee twat. used to like him, now just another precious artiste. file next to Jobriath. NEXT.

    Posted by: resurrect | Dec 8, 2008 6:05:40 PM

  17. This thinking is indicative of a LOT of gays. They really don’t get what Marriage Equality is about at all. They think Marriage Equality is a group of gays that want to end the slutty ways of other gays (multiple partners, anonymous sex, etc.) by making them all get married. We need to educate these folks, now.

    Posted by: ggreen | Dec 8, 2008 6:06:45 PM

  18. what a complete TOOL !

    beasts cannot consent to a contract, and neither can children.

    Posted by: hangten | Dec 8, 2008 6:07:54 PM

  19. what a complete TOOL !

    beasts cannot consent to a contract, and neither can children.

    Posted by: hangten | Dec 8, 2008 6:09:18 PM

  20. I have a question for the masses, out of genuine curiosity...
    How will marriage equality provide other forms of civil rights? What about employment discrimination? How does marriage equality fix that?
    I'm a full supporter of marriage equality, and agree with the right for same-sex couples to share a legal bond (even if I currently can't see myself in such a commitment). However, I struggle with the elitism of the movement. After all, most gay marriage supporters and protesters needn't worry about loosing their job, or substandard health care (to name just a couple of issues still facing LGBTQ Americans), because they represent the upper strata of society (well off, primarily white, men and women who live in urbanized settings long known to be gay friendly). So yes, I advocate for marriage equality, but I also advocate for FULL equality. We must not forget that LGBTQ individuals continue to lack basic rights in a multitude of areas, not just marriage, and that concerns of marriage are paramount mainly to the entitled. After all, they don't need to worry as much if their next employer will fire them for being gay, or if some bozo will bash their face in.

    Posted by: Yoni | Dec 8, 2008 6:24:00 PM

  21. While I'm a big Rufus Wainwright fan, I think this quote is damaging for a few reasons. 1.) How many times in defense of the "slippery slope" of gay marriage do people say "If we allow two persons of the same sex who love each other to marry, what next? Sheep? Dogs? Fondue sets?" The fact that he threw the "I don't care if you marry your dog" in somewhat trivializes the importance of what I hope he meant to say. As many have already said, marrying a conscenting adult taxpayer is distinctly different from marrying one's pet.
    2.) Libritarians may consider themselves being socially liberal, but a lot of what it means to be fiscially conservative seems to come into direct contrast with such views -take outsoursing for example, great for the corporate turks not so great for the American worker-(unless one turns a blind eye ). Most libritarians I know are a stones throw from being Conservative anyway.

    Posted by: g_whiz | Dec 8, 2008 6:25:03 PM

  22. If some some right-winger had mentioned marrying a dog in the context of discussing gay marriages, he'd be raked through the coals in the progressive blogsphere. And I think RW should be too, even though I know he's not mean-spirited -- only naive and perhaps self-centered. But I sort of understand where he's coming from.
    In an ideal world in which ones personal life and domestic status (partnered or not, w/children or not, etc.) do not confer any legal, economic or social benefits, I would agree with the libertarian sentiment that the government should have nothing to do with marriage. But the world we live in is obviously far from ideal. Marriage does provide many specific benefits which shouldn't be denied to us. And not allowing the legal sanctioning of gay marriages sends the message to the world that our relationships and committments to those we love are less important, less valid than heterosexual ones. I'll be against gay people having the right to legally marry only when straight people cease to have that right, and marriage ceases to automatically confer so many benefits.

    PS I can't resist commenting on RW's music. I can't stand it! It's so precious, so whiny! Maybe what I can't stand is the way so many regard him as somehow representative of gay people.

    Posted by: Michael J | Dec 8, 2008 6:27:12 PM

  23. A lot of us don't want to get married but are still out there marching, voting, donating, talking, et al about the issue all we can. And a soundbite is a soundbite is a soundbite. I'm not prepared to jump down the guy's throat over a few sentences that in the end ultimately speak in favor of equal rights.

    Posted by: Jay | Dec 8, 2008 6:32:52 PM

  24. What an ass. Marriage equality and the government rights and protections that come with it have nothing to do with "what goes on in the bedroom". Way to go Rufus!... reduce the rights of gay and lesbian couples to a sex act. Dobson must be proud.

    Wainwright is too dumb to know he's repeating a right wing talking point drummed into his methed up brain. And you're right GGREEN, he's not alone. It's depressing to hear selfish and ignorant gay folk like Rufus say they don't care about marriage much because they don't want to get married themselves. Internalized homophobia... some of us deal with it better than others.

    Posted by: JohnInManhattan | Dec 8, 2008 6:35:50 PM

  25. what a talent ! rufus sings through his nose and talks out his ass.

    Posted by: el polacko | Dec 8, 2008 6:38:52 PM

  26. 1 2 3 »

Post a comment


« «News: The Bible, Thong, Oaxaca, Josh Holloway, Cape Cod« «