Evangelical Christians | Evangelicals | Gay Marriage | News | Rand Paul

Rand Paul Has a Plan to Keep Marriage Debate Going for Another Couple of Decades: VIDEO


Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) tells Christian Broadcast Network's David Brody that conservatives cannot win a marriage battle at the federal level, so the only hope conservatives have to keep the "traditional" marriage debate alive is to keep marriage at the state level since certain states are likely to remain anti-gay for a long time:

"I think right now if we say we're only going to [have] a federally mandated one man, one woman marriage, we're going to lose that battle because the country is going the other way right now. If we're to say each state can decide, I think a good 25, 30 states still do believe in traditional marriage, and maybe we allow that debate to go on for another couple of decades and see if we can still win back the hearts and minds of people."


Feed This post's comment feed


  1. You just have to look at this ignoramus and you know that within that numb-skull of his is a barren landscape. Be it inherited from his equally crazy father, compounded by his mother, or he fell on his head.

    Why can't all Americans see through this nutcase!

    Posted by: BRAINS | Apr 7, 2013 12:47:22 AM

  2. Hillbilly troglodyte with a plan to prevent the future from happening.

    Posted by: Richard | Apr 7, 2013 2:27:56 AM

  3. Well good luck, of course you won't have a party left before much longer. People don't like the hate. The younger people are, the less they support it. It's over. Get on with life already. Why do you think 51 US Senators are behind gay marriage? They read the tea leaves. Keep going if you want to completely destroy your party, but a sane person would drop this.

    Posted by: Craig | Apr 7, 2013 3:48:30 AM

  4. @Rich
    Even without Section 2, states still wouldn't be required to recognize other marriages. Back in the 1930s, the Supreme Court created a public policy exception to the Full Faith and Credit Clause. It allows a state to ignore any law from another state that conflicts with a clearly stated public policy. Such as a constitutional amendment. They are only required to recognize court judgments. Which is why adoption degrees are portable and one reason why second parent adoptions are recommended even in equality states.

    It's all part of the excessive concept of American federalism and the constitution treating states as independent colonies instead of subdivisions of one country with limited power. Back in the 18th century that may have made sense, but today it's simply impractical and unworkable.

    Posted by: Steve | Apr 7, 2013 7:02:56 AM

  5. A state by state solution is no more sustainable than it was when Loving was ruled on. If the SCOTUS is ridiculous enough to allow this patchwork joke to play out it will only be for a couple more years and they it will be back in their laps and they will have to cupped their balls and make an actual ruling.

    Interstate commerce, the military, equal protect....you just cannot have people gaining and losing or being denied equal rights from state to state. They know that now. It's why I think there is still a "chance" for a big ruling, regardless of what they would like or are scared to do. A 9 state solution will start an avalanche of new law suits from every conceivable direction, the military, the private and public sectors.

    Posted by: Michaelandfred | Apr 7, 2013 9:20:16 AM

  6. "...we can still win back the hearts and minds of people"

    Say what?!? Exactly what "winning" argument do you have to make people decide that EQUALITY is a bad thing after all? And since young people support marriage rights by something like 80% you'd need to actively turn a huge number of them against their gay friends and relatives. Good luck with that.

    Posted by: e.c. | Apr 7, 2013 9:49:32 AM

  7. Paul's as dim as a box of rocks and has one talent - insterting his foot in his mouth and chewing. What an embarrassment to his species!

    Posted by: Tarc | Apr 7, 2013 10:36:00 AM

  8. The dude is getting gayer and gayer looking by the year...

    Posted by: Alan Brickman | Apr 7, 2013 11:49:46 AM

  9. As*hole. So much for his "Libertarian" status.

    Posted by: noteasilyoffended | Apr 7, 2013 12:17:38 PM

  10. Hagatha, you point out something critically important. The majority of states' legislatures are Republican-controlled. The majority of states' governors are Republican. The result is that The House of Representatives is in Republican control and will stay so, thanks to the majority of Republican states' legislatures gerry-mandering election districts to ensure Republican hegemony in each two-year election cycle for The House.

    LGBT activists for civil equality focus on the federal courts and the Presidency. The Republicans focus on where the REAL power lies, which are the states.

    Witness the barrage of states' laws recently passed by majority Republican legislatures against women's personal autonomy, or the failure to get sane gun regulations passed or the continuing denial of civil equality to LGBT people.

    This is where we lose the war if we're not careful. I loathe Rand Paul and his brand of libertarianism which always claims that "these things are for the states to decide". Rand Paul is right: control the states, control the power, and wait for attitudes to change back to what they were just ten years ago, if not 50 years ago or 100 years ago where women and gay people are concerned.

    Take nothing for granted, friends. Women and gays are living in fantasy land if they believe that we can't lose this war against right-wing reaction. All it would take is this: a veto-proof majority in The House of Representatives, passing Constitutional amendments then sent to the states, which pass easily through Republican-controlled state legislatures garnering the required 2/3 majority to be inscribed into the Constitution.

    If you think this can't happen, then you are NOT paying attention.

    Posted by: jamal49 | Apr 7, 2013 1:03:45 PM

  11. I just can't listen to this man--his hillbilly accent renders any IQ that he may have had, null and void. That he's spouting nonsense, is a foregone conclusion when I hear that dim-witted accent. It gives decent intelligent Southern people (they do exist) a bad name.

    Posted by: kdknyc | Apr 7, 2013 1:55:22 PM

  12. This has been the strategy on every gay issue. They want gay people to keep spinning their wheels.

    Posted by: Billy Crytical | Apr 7, 2013 7:22:33 PM

  13. In the long run Western Civilization has been moving toward full equality for all.

    Posted by: andrew | Apr 7, 2013 10:46:32 PM

  14. One marriage, if a heterosexual marriage is recognized by one state than it is recognized by all. So there for under the equal protection clause of the constitution, I may marry whomever I want.

    Posted by: Rees Cramer | Apr 11, 2013 2:09:01 PM

  15. « 1 2

Post a comment


« «A Preview of This Year's Broadway Bares: VIDEO« «