Posted on 04/21/2015 7:43:46 AM PDT by wagglebee
WASHINGTON, D.C., April 20, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Are you now, or were you ever, willing to attend a same-sex “wedding”? That seems to be the question lighting up the Republican presidential field, as GOP hopefuls who may one day have their finger on the nuclear button are asked the query over and over again.
So far, the Republican hopefuls' answers are yes, no, I have (sort of), and...unclear.
The media began by asking Florida's U.S. senator, Marco Rubio, if he would attend a homosexual 'wedding' ceremony, especially if he were invited by a relative or close friend.
“If there’s somebody that I love that’s in my life, I don’t necessarily have to agree with their decisions or the decisions they’ve made to continue to love them and participate in important events,” Rubio told Jorge Ramos of Fusion TV's America program.
Rubio, who became the third Republican to throw his hat in the ring last week, likened attending a same-sex “marriage” to attending the second marriage of a divorced friend. “If someone gets divorced, I’m not going to stop loving them or having them a part of our lives,” he said.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker – who has not yet formally announced his candidacy yet is considered a front-runner – said that he attended a same-sex reception, but not a ceremony. “I haven’t been to a [homosexual] 'wedding,' that’s true,” he said, “even though my position on marriage is still that’s defined between a man and a woman, and I support the Constitution of the state.”
“But for someone I love, we’ve been at a reception,” he added.
A series of candidates and potential candidates have faced similar hypotheticals.
Radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt, a libertarian-leaning Republican who strongly supported Mitt Romney in previous primaries, asked two contenders “a meta-question.” Is it more important to know whether a candidate would attend a homosexual wedding or whether a president will “destroy the Islamic State before it throws hundreds of thousands of gay men to their deaths”?
Former Pennsylvania senator and 2012 presidential candidate Rick Santorum, who has said he is considering another presidential run, said it was “amazing that the Left has not risen up” against Islamic Shari'a law. “They don't focus their energy on anything except the attempt to gather more power in this country by using this issue of same-sex 'marriage' as a tool to do that.”
Then he addressed the direct question: Would he attend a gay “marriage” ceremony?
“No, I would not,” he replied curtly. When asked why not, he said, “As a person of my faith, that would be something that would be a violation of my faith. I would love them and support them, but I would not participate in that ceremony.”
Ted Cruz, the first Republican to say he will seek the GOP's presidential nomination next year, gave a more roundabout reply.
“That's part of the 'gotcha' game that the mainstream media plays, where they come after Republicans on every front, and it's designed to caricature Republicans to make them look stupid or evil or crazy or extreme,” he said. “Sadly, most media players are not actual, objective journalists. They're active partisan players.”
He called reporters “the praetorian guard protecting the Obama administration” now gearing up to campaign for Hillary Clinton.
Cruz said he had not attended a gay “marriage” ceremony but made no commitments about the future.
“Well, I will tell you, I haven’t faced that circumstance,” he said. “I have not had a loved one have a gay wedding. You know, at the end of the day, what the media tries to twist the question of marriage into is they try to twist it into a battle of emotions and personalities. So they say, 'Gosh, any conservative must hate gays.'”
The Texas senator said that he is a conservative Christian and also “a constitutionalist.”
“What we’ve seen in recent years from the Left is the federal government and unelected federal judges imposing their own policy preferences to tear down the marriage laws of the states.”
“And so if someone is running for public office, it is perfectly legitimate to ask them their views on whether they’re willing to defend the Constitution, which leaves marriage to the states, or whether they want to impose their own extreme policy views like so many on the left are doing, like Barack Obama does, like Hillary Clinton does,” he said.
Don’t answer this question and ask why is the government promoting such a risky behavior?
Pray America is waking
And Walker “did.” But there are other postures he has recently left behind as well, e.g. great leniency on illegal immigration. So we don’t know everything we’d like to know about Walker.
All of them would say Uncle Sam should have no role in this matter at all.
Yes, just in case any Paultards were wondering why their golden boy was left out of the list.
That sounds like it would be a good idea. In fact it could be upped from risky to dangerous.
It will not matter in the least if they refuse to play.
There are dozens of other ways to communicate their beliefs that are not on the MSM's terms.
There is a lot to be said for “here’s the facts jack now what’s it to ya?”
So you demand republican candidates play the media’s game according to the media’s rules?
The headline is misleading.
Walker did not attend a “gay wedding.”
That discussion would end the question in a hurry. That is exactly what they don’t want to discuss.
Play the media’s game? I would avoid being in that position. No candidate has to submit to grilling from some media twit. But if I’m in that position and they ask the question, the best thing to do is to give an honest, direct answer and let the chips fall where they may. That’s what this voter respects.
I was not suggesting they would.
Rather, homosexual act is itself akin to masturbation. So celebrating a public ceremony of a gay “wedding” is similar to celebrating a public ceremony whose central implication is that the celebrant would masturbate.
The answer should be simple, repugnant No.
I didn’t see his name in the article, so I wondered...
I also respect direct answers. “I’m not playing gotcha with you” or “Why don’t you quit being an idiot and ask something relevant” (both are reasonable understanding of Cruz’s words) *is* a direct answer.
Just because a media twit, as you so aptly phrased it, is in a position to demonstrate their twit-ness (because a campaign that avoids all contact with media is not a campaign) does not mean that the candidate has to respond to the question according to the twit’s desires.
In this case, the media wants to tarnish the R candidates in conservatives’ eyes for any positive response. Secondarily, the media wants to outrage the homo agenda community for any negative response.
So, “stop being a twit” (diplomatically) is a valid and direct answer to the media’s attempt to tarnish the candidate.
That is, at least, my opinion. LOL
I don’t agree, but I understand your frustration.
So what if you attend a gay wedding?
I don’t think they should be allowed by the State.
At the same time, if they are legal then what if it’s your son’s or daughter’s? You have a right to go or not go.
What if it’s your best friend’s son’s or daughter?
I don’t believe in gay marriage.
I don’t believe in Budhism either. But that wouldn’t stop me from attending their wedding ceremony.
I certainly am not put off by Santorum’s answer but leftist interviewers are well versed in crafting questions where any answer can be spun into something negative. Thus the most correct path is to attack the very premise of the question, and do it in a way which allows you to bring the conversation back to the failings of statism.
Exactly.
They are trying to do a Todd Akin or a George Allen moment...get a sound bite like “legtreasure rape” or “macaca” and beat it into the ground.
Wise up, Republicans.
Post 37 should have said “legitimate rape”.
Hitlery: I’m going to have one!
The correct terminology should be “homosexual fake marriage”.
It’s not gay. It isn’t real. And it certainly has nothing to do with the union of one man and one woman.
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.