Eric Cantor | Gay Marriage | News

CNBC Host Challenges Eric Cantor on Gay Marriage: 'No One's Asking You to Marry Another Guy'

Cantor

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) was challenged by Squawkbox host Joe Kernen about the GOP position on same-sex marriage. Kernen wondered if the GOP might regret being on the wrong side of an issue that a majority of Americans support.

Cantor refused to give, suggesting that there's an "intolerance" of those who defend 'traditional' marriage:

There are those of us who have personal religious convictions about the issue. And I think we as a country need to respect people about their opinion, not matter which side you come down on....Some of the things we stand for somehow aren't being received in the proper way and it's being portrayed as being we don't care about people."

Hmmm.... like the $3 million House Republicans have spent defending on DOMA?

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. That is one astounding display of complacency.
    For Cantor speak of "tolerance" demonstrates that he is a small mined ideologue.....he ignores the rabid anti women , anti gay actions of the Republicans.

    Je me souvien, as they say in Quebec.

    Posted by: JackFknTwist | Apr 6, 2013 9:03:26 AM


  2. I'm so tired of these assholes saying, "We ought to be tolerant, but if someone has religious beliefs...." Screw you, and screw your religious beliefs.

    "Why can't we spend more time on things we agree on?" Why can't we spend more time on stuff we *DON'T* agree on?

    What a jerk... I'm SO tired of people like him.

    Posted by: MikeKV | Apr 6, 2013 9:07:33 AM


  3. If your "opinion" includes illegally controlling any aspect of MY life and illegally forcing me to adhere to your religious "convictions" not only violating the establishment clause (which you, Cantor, took an oath of office to uphold) but violating my 1st and 14th amendment rights then NO I absolutely do not have to and will not respect you.

    Posted by: RMc | Apr 6, 2013 9:09:21 AM


  4. Boom! RMc you said it! I do not have to respect bigots who most certainly do not respect me or my human and civil rights.

    Posted by: SoLeftImRight | Apr 6, 2013 9:13:34 AM


  5. The Repubs hooked their wagon to a bunch of mental midgets and they are going over the cliff with them.

    You've made a stand and now you're dead.

    Buh Bye

    Posted by: AllBeefPatty | Apr 6, 2013 9:14:03 AM


  6. Lets all remind Cantor - Separation of church and state! His religious convictions are irrelevant to the issue of equal rights.

    Posted by: John Freeman | Apr 6, 2013 9:23:10 AM


  7. I'm so sick of the word "tolerance". While I understand the original intent of that word in regard to teaching tolerance, the Republican concept/definition of this is "to put up with". They see gay people as something wholly negative and undesirable and the word tolerance just gives them a verbal pass when discussing these subjects. Then when they don't really concede anything on the issue they trot in red herrings like like the economy--as if the issue they stay focused on is suddenly a non-issue. WTF?

    Posted by: Mark | Apr 6, 2013 9:31:25 AM


  8. Ugh. I am just SOO sick of this topic. There, I said it. Let's get it legal and move on. The same arguments, the same clueless bigots, nothing new is being said or presented. As Willow would say, "Bored now."

    Posted by: AJ | Apr 6, 2013 9:34:42 AM


  9. Ah yes, typical fascist victim blaming. Nobody has to tolerate intolerance.

    Posted by: Steve | Apr 6, 2013 9:38:15 AM


  10. I'm sure that since Eric Cantor is Jewish he also has a "personal religious conviction" about whether people should eat bacon. But, I don't see him trying to outlaw it.

    Posted by: anonymous | Apr 6, 2013 9:49:49 AM


  11. The thing is, men like Cantor have no real regard for our lives. If we all died today, he wouldn't care less. So any argument on the merits of equality, on the damage being done towards couples without it, means absolutely nothing to him. He doesn't care because he doesn't care about us.

    Posted by: Francis #1 | Apr 6, 2013 9:53:41 AM


  12. Also, if religious convictions have any legitimacy as an official inspiration for policy, I might mention that my religious faith embraces equal marriage. Thus, Cantor's policy is an intolerant violation of my religious convictions.

    Posted by: Rafa in Toronto | Apr 6, 2013 9:54:27 AM


  13. Double standards.

    Posted by: Matt26 | Apr 6, 2013 10:06:30 AM


  14. It's impossible to watch Eric Cantor speak about anything without wanting to punch him in the face.

    Posted by: Arrant | Apr 6, 2013 10:34:45 AM


  15. AJ

    LOVING the Willow reference.

    Posted by: Arrant | Apr 6, 2013 10:36:27 AM


  16. Sorry Mr. Cantor,when you try to impose your religious beliefs on me through civil law,my "tolerence" for you ends.

    Posted by: Kevin | Apr 6, 2013 10:48:27 AM


  17. Poor Eric just wants some tolerance for his intolerance. Jews should disown this guy. In fact, humanity should disown him.

    Posted by: Richard | Apr 6, 2013 10:48:47 AM


  18. Yeah, those f'ing intolerant people who actually want civil rights for all citizens.

    People like Cantor should take a long look at a clip of another anti-civil rights person who said he was the tolerant person saying "Segregation today, Segregation tomowwa, segregation foreveh" and see how Cantor and his ilk are going to look.

    Posted by: Hamish | Apr 6, 2013 10:57:26 AM


  19. Arrant: :)

    I'm not some moron with my head in the sand. I live in Minneapolis and we got POUNDED with this issue over the last election. It was EVERYWHERE before we defeated the marriage amendment. I'm just so tired of it. And every single political yahoo out there that "evolves" on this issue deserves their own post? Just. Bored. It's 2013. I can't believe this is still an issue. We should be ashamed as a fairly progressive country that we have been so mired down by religious BS that we are still fighting this fight. The generation behind ours totally gets it. Old stuffy people need to die and this will go away.

    Posted by: AJ | Apr 6, 2013 10:58:37 AM


  20. Just a thought for Towleroad readers...

    Strictly speaking, religion cannot be removed from public policy. Religion embraces almost every aspect of life. For example, the laws against theft and murder trace back in our culture to the Ten Commandments. Our secular law criminalizes those deeds BECAUSE the lawmakers were originally influenced by Church teachings. It is theoretically possible to abolish the laws against stealing and allow "Whoever's smartest to keep the goods." Ditto for murder. So there are two laws firmly based on religion.

    The notion that religion can be abolished as an aspect of public society is unrealistic.

    Posted by: ernstroehm's ghost | Apr 6, 2013 11:14:20 AM


  21. Religious people have a right to express their views but at the same time they can not dictate government policy just because this offend their GOD. ( well at least when it's convenient) And why don't all these anti-gay bigots fight to end divorce which is a real threat to " traditional" marriage ?

    Posted by: jaragon | Apr 6, 2013 11:22:30 AM


  22. Religious people have a right to express their views but at the same time they can not dictate government policy just because this offend their GOD. ( well at least when it's convenient) And why don't all these anti-gay bigots fight to end divorce which is a real threat to " traditional" marriage ?

    Posted by: jaragon | Apr 6, 2013 11:22:31 AM


  23. Yes, ernstroehm's ghost, the prohibitions against theft and murder come directly from the Ten Commandments. That's why theft and murder are legal in countries such as Japan. Oh, wait.

    Posted by: Merv | Apr 6, 2013 11:29:26 AM


  24. People's perception that you don't care about other people is accurate, Eric. That's why it bothers you so much: you know it's true.

    There was a great PBS documentary series in the early 90s called "Eyes on the Prize". In it they showed a white woman (archival footage from the early 60s) whining about losing her "right" to eat in a whites only restaurant. "Why isn't anyone talking about my rights?" That's what this crowd will sound like in a few decades. To some of us that's what they already sound like. The right to deny other people their rights is NOT a right. Acting as if you deserve tolerance for being a bigot is the definition of absurdity.

    Posted by: Houndentenor | Apr 6, 2013 11:46:36 AM


  25. Posted by: Merv | Apr 6, 2013 11:29:26 AM

    +1,000

    Posted by: Henry Holland | Apr 6, 2013 11:48:42 AM


  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Towleroad Talking Points: More Talk of Gays in the NFL« «