Posted on 04/16/2015 3:35:16 AM PDT by markomalley
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Florida), the newest and youngest official Republican candidate for president, has said he believes marriage should be “traditional”—between a man and a woman.
So Fusion’s Jorge Ramos asked him: If someone in his family or on his staff were gay and getting married, would he attend the wedding?
“If it’s somebody in my life that I care for, of course I would,” Rubio told Ramos in an interview on Wednesday.
“I’m not going to hurt them simply because I disagree with a choice they’ve made or because I disagree with a decision they’ve made, or whatever it may be,” he added. “Ultimately, if someone that you care for and is part of your family has decided to move in one direction or another or feels that way because of who they love, you respect that because you love them.”
Rubio spoke with Ramos about a variety of issues, including marriage equality, immigration reform, climate change, President Barack Obama’s move to normalize relations with Cuba, and which rapper or singer he’d like to perform at his potential 2017 inauguration.
In the early throes of his campaign, Rubio has positioned himself as the candidate of “tomorrow.” He has cast himself as a young, fresh alternative to other Republicans and to likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, who he referred to in his announcement speech as the candidate of “yesterday.”
But his stance on gay marriage has led to questions on whether he’s more out of touch than Clinton with young people on certain issues. According to a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, 74 percent of 18-to-34-year-olds said they were in favor of allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry. On Tuesday, CNN anchor Jake Tapper called Rubio “the candidate of yesterday” on the issue of marriage equality.
Rubio said that while he personally opposes gay marriage, he would encourage people in favor to petition their state legislatures to permit same-sex marriages. He does not think the decision should be left up to courts, he said.
“I would point out that we live in a free society,” Rubio said. “If people want to change the definition of marriage, they should petition their state legislature, and they can have that debate in the political arena. Who I don’t think should be redefining marriage is the court system.”
Rubio, who is Catholic, noted that his faith also teaches that divorce is wrong, and he drew on that as a comparison to his personal feelings on gay marriage.
“But again, as I said, I’m a member of the Catholic faith that teaches, for example, that divorce is wrong,” Rubio said. “But if someone gets divorced, I’m not going to stop loving them or having them a part of our lives.”
I'm not certain I understand your statement. Are you saying that "divorced persons" should not be loved? And if so, why would you say that?
See my #34 above.
Support for "gay rights" is an absolute requirement to be elected to anything, or to remain in office if you have already been elected, for two reasons:
1) It proves you don't "discriminate". Not discriminating is hugely popular with voters.
2) It proves you don't criticize that prime directive of American culture and entertainment, which is "f*** who you want, when, where, and how you want, ignoring any existing arrangements and sending others the bill for any consequences". This is also hugely popular with voters.
No. That's your opinion. That silly question is a good opening to engage the "personally opposed, but....." position that so may squishes also mumble about abortion.
A good society proscribes things that attack its health and vigor. It does take more than a 15 second sound bite to explain that, though.
"The APA (American Psychiatric Association) claimed that they made the change because new research showed that most homosexual people were content with their sexual orientation, and that as a group, they appeared to be as well-adjusted as heterosexual people."
Call me "skeptical". Just how "well adjusted" are the average psychiatrist's patients?
Homosexuality stopped being a mental illness not because of any scientific research, but because on April 9, 1974, 5,854 of 17,905 APA members (32.7%) had voted that it wasn't a mental illness..
Okay -- 1.6 percent of adults self-identify as gay or lesbian, and 0.7 percent consider themselves bisexual ... and that is "normal".
I would suggest that there is better evidence of a shortage of English dictionaries and widespread problems with English language comprehension than that here, in the United States, in 2015 gays and lesbians lack any natural, God-given rights.
If Cruz is to be nominated or elected, he will have to support public and cultural acclaim for homosexual relationships.
It is barely possible he could get away with the "civil unions" dodge, but that is probably no longer going to work.
I love Rush, but he’s lost on this one, mainly because he’s not “saved”. That said, this is why he seems to gravitate to Rubio.
Maybe he'll just play the Elton John clips from his own wedding...
He’s done. He didn’t really have anything going for him except being a conservative Hispanic, and now he’s lost the conservative part of that.
Nope. That is the strawman that Marco built.
His words
“But again, as I said, I’m a member of the Catholic faith that teaches, for example, that divorce is wrong,” Rubio said. “But if someone gets divorced, I’m not going to stop loving them or having them a part of our lives.”
Do I need to explain in detail how fallacious that is? Please say that I don't
Rubio makes some common sense and clear comments and some of the idjits come out in force. He doesn’t need to be president, but not because of his comments from the article.
Rubio fooled me. I voted for him believing that he was a Conservative. It won’t happen again.
> “If it’s somebody in my life that I care for, of course I would,”
Wrong answer.
If he’s this mealy-mouthed as a candidate, imagine what a pushover he’d be as a president.
Senor Amnestia just stepped in serious mierda.
Care to engage the arguments to support the name calling?
Why would he even get into the weeds on this and answer these questions?Rubio is done. Too easily taken off message.
bump
Looks like he Santorumed....
ff
Amnesty + gay marriage = RINO.
Damn sure does!
JimRob nuked a rather astounding thread yesterday. Apparently there are more than a few FReepers who have forgotten that the crux of abortion is the life of a child, NOT some faux "right" to inhibit reproduction.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.