2012 Election | Gay Marriage | Marco Rubio | Mitt Romney | News

Marco Rubio: The Gay Marriage Debate 'is About What Society Should Tolerate'

Yesterday, after ABC News reported that Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) was not being vetted as a potential pick for Romney's running mate, the Romney campaign made a rare disclosure that Rubio was, in fact, being vetted for the job.

RubioChristianity Today later in the day posted a long interview with Rubio about his faith and issues related to it. One of them was same-sex marriage:

The debate is about what society should tolerate, and what society should allow our laws to be. I believe marriage is a unique and specific institution that is the result of thousands of years of wisdom, which concluded that the ideal — not the only way but certainly the ideal — situation to raise children to become productive and healthy humans is in a home with a father and mother married to each other. Does that mean people who are not in that circumstance cannot be successful? Of course not.

It’s not a discriminatory thing. I’m not angry at anyone because of it, but I also have to be honest about what I believe marriage should be in our laws.

In May, Rubio reiterated that he opposes gay marriage for religious reasons, but that the decision should be left to the states. He also knocked Obama for using the issue as a political tool.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. But of course the current law IS discriminatory. Whether or not society "tolerates" (I hate that word, btw) gay marriage, many same sex couples share lives together in ways that are indistinguishable from marriage except in how the state and/or federal government regards their relationship.

    But then what do we expect from an anchor baby in the party that rails against anchor babies.

    Posted by: Houndentenor | Jun 20, 2012 11:30:44 AM

  2. "-he is too brown for the repub base"

    He is not brown, he is white, as are most of the Cubans who left when Castro came to power. They were the elite of Cuban society, affiliated with American money interests, and as is the case in most Latin American countries, that elite is "puro castellano"--purely of European descent.

    He is getting great political mileage out of claiming to be "Latino" because it makes guilt-ridden white people feel good to embrace a "non-white" in any position of significance, but, in reality, he is no less white than Mitt Romney.....and fit in perfectly with all the WASP frat boys he went to college with.

    Posted by: Rick | Jun 20, 2012 11:51:57 AM

  3. Interesting choice of words, Marco, since I can barely tolerate you.

    Posted by: David | Jun 20, 2012 12:04:19 PM

  4. what an odd stance.

    isn't it a better "ideal" for society that there isn't such a gallingly-large gap between "rich" and "poor"?

    that's a bigger moral issue. disparity of income and means to make ends meet.

    Posted by: Rick | Jun 20, 2012 12:17:00 PM

  5. So... how would he feel if society decided to "tolerate" discrimination against Hispanics?

    Posted by: HB | Jun 20, 2012 12:19:38 PM

  6. Yes, but worse than that, Rubio cancelled on Jon Stewart.

    Posted by: Jerry | Jun 20, 2012 12:30:51 PM

  7. I wondering if vetting a VP pick is sort of like extortion or blackmail. Do they use the information they get as leverage against the person to control them? I guess that didn't work so well with Sarah Palin, but the vetting process there seemed pretty weak.

    Posted by: anon | Jun 20, 2012 1:37:55 PM

  8. Perhaps someone should remind him that with his oath of office to become a United States he pledged to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Perhaps he needs to read it again and this time pay particular attention to that section which says: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. It is a shame that so many legislators believe in the first and second amendments but pay so little attention the principles of the 14th amendment to the Constitution of the United States which they pledged to preserve, protect, and defend.

    Posted by: vanndean | Jun 20, 2012 3:43:39 PM

  9. « 1 2

Post a comment


« «Two Guys Read Fred Karger's Anti-Gay Emails: VIDEO« «