What do the Republican Candidates Believe About Same-Sex Marriage / Civil Unions?
Y= for · N= against
Click on image to enlarge.
Donald Trump: GM=”N”* / CU=?*
“Donald, go on the record,” says Stern. “You’re for gay marriage.”
“Well, I’m not,” responds Trump, surprising both Stern and his co-host Robin Quivers. He continues, “It’s never been an argument that’s been discussed with me very much. “People know that it’s not my thing one way or the other.”
Trump’s position on marriage equality hasn’t necessarily been a secret, but the 66-year-old millionaire hasn’t advocated on behalf of one side or the other, either.
In March 2011, he told Bill O’Reilly, “I just don’t feel good about it. I don’t feel right about it. And I take a lot of heat because I come from New York,” according to Queerty.
Two months later, in a New York Times profile written by Michael Barbaro, he attempted to liken same-sex marriage to golfers “switching to these really long putters.” He brushed off the conversation telling Barbaro he has “fabulous” gay friends but is a “traditionalist.”
Still, “Star Trek” legend George Takei hinted that Trump may secretly support gay unions. The two sat down for lunch in December and Takei revealed, “It was a lively and engaging hour-long conversation that touched upon his personal position on marriage equality. He confided that he recently attended a same-sex wedding and that he’d found it ‘beautiful.'”
But asked whether gay couples should be able access the same benefits as married couples, he said his “attitude on it has not been fully formed.”
Is Donald Trump 2016’s most LGBT-friendly Republican?
With his penchant for name-calling and plans to deport every undocumented immigrant living in the United States, Donald Trump hasn’t exactly established a reputation for tolerance. Yet the real estate mogul and reality TV host might nevertheless be the most LGBT-friendly Republican running for president.
Asked whether private companies should be able to fire employees simply because they’re gay, Trump told “Meet The Press” host Chuck Todd on Sunday that he didn’t think sexual orientation “should be a reason” for letting workers go.
The question is a significant one for any White House hopeful – currently, 31 states lack employment protections for LGBT Americans, by the Human Rights Campaign’s count, and there are no federal barriers to discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Trump’s response, however, marked a significant departure from the rest of the crowded GOP presidential pack, many of whom have pledged to expand protections for those wishing to turn away LGBT people on religious grounds.
“It’s a complicated relationship that Trump has with the LGBT community …” Gregory T. Angelo, Log Cabin Republicans
** It’s not the first time Trump has taken a pro-LGBT stance. As far back as 2000, Trump was advocating the idea of amending the 1964 Civil Rights Act to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation – something the currently-pending Equality Act would basically do if lawmakers on Capitol Hill ever decided to pass it.
“[A]mending the Civil Rights Act would grant the same protection to gay people that we give to other Americans – it’s only fair,” Trump told The Advocate in February, 2000. In the same interview, Trump ** said he favored “a very strong domestic-partnership law” that guaranteed same-sex couples equal legal rights as married, heterosexual couples. Trump also said he believed Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell – the military’s then-ban on openly gay service members – had “clearly failed.”
Trump’s spokesperson, Hope Hicks, did not immediately respond to msnbc’s request for comment on where the presidential candidate stood on the Equality Act. But his longstanding support for ending discrimination against gay people has been well documented.
In his 2000 book, “The America That We Deserve,” Trump outlined his dream of a nation
** “unencumbered by bureaucratic ineptitude, government regulation, confiscatory tax policies, racism, discrimination against women, or discrimination against people based on sexual orientation.” Eleven years later, Trump told CBN’s “The Brody File” that gay people were “tremendous” and that “there can be no discrimination against gays.”
(Page 23 of the Advocate in the link above)
Ben Carson: GM=N / CU= Y
“While I strongly disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision, their ruling is now the law of the land,” he said.
Carson expressed concern about the religious liberty of Christians who believe in traditional marriage.
“I support same sex civil unions but to me, and millions like me, marriage is a religious service not a government form,” he said.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/26/ben-carson-acknowledges-gay-marriage-is-now-the-law-of-the-land/#ixzz3qMTPZqdw
WASHINGTON — Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson said he thinks marriage should be between one man and one woman, but that doesn’t make him a homophobe. In fact, he said, it’s the people who criticize opponents of same-sex marriage who are the real problem.
“There is no reason that you can’t be perfectly fair to the gay community” if you’re opposed to marriage equality, Carson said during Wednesday’s GOP debate. “This is one of the myths that the left perpetuates on our society. This is how they frighten people and get people to shut up.
Ted Cruz: GM=N / CU=N
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz intends to make his opposition to the Supreme Court’s decision last week to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide “front and center” in his presidential campaign.
Cruz said that 20 states have a system in place where voters can choose to either keep or remove their judges if they “overstep their bounds [and] violate the constitution.”
“That is very much front and center something I intend to campaign on,” he said. “And marriage and religious liberty are going to be integral, I believe, to motivating the American people to come out and vote for what’s, ultimately, restoring our constitutional system.”
Ted Cruz has some unsolicited advice for the states not specifically named in last week’s Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage: Ignore it.
“Those who are not parties to the suit are not bound by it,” the Texas Republican told NPR News’ Steve Inskeep in an interview published on Monday. Since only suits against the states of Ohio, Tennessee, Michigan and Kentucky were specifically considered in the Supreme Court’s Obergefell v. Hodge s decision, which was handed down last Friday, Cruz — a former Supreme Court clerk — believes that other states with gay marriage bans need not comply, absent a judicial order
CRUZ: It is my sincere hope that the Supreme Court will rule on the side of the U.S. Constitution
Issues statement on Supreme Court marriage case
“For millennia, the union of a man and a woman has been the fundamental building block of society, and the Judeo-Christian value of traditional marriage is a cornerstone upon which the strength of our Nation rests. Before 2004, no U.S. state recognized same-sex marriages. And to preserve the traditional understanding of marriage, thirty states have amended their state constitutions to define marriage as between one man and one woman, and in total over forty states have passed laws or amendments to protect traditional marriage.
“This effort to redefine marriage by judicial fiat poses a serious threat to the religious liberty for those who embrace traditional marriage. We are seeing businesses shut down and individuals threatened with costly lawsuits simply because they do not agree with same-sex marriage. There was a time when the defense of religious liberty was an issue of bipartisan agreement. Yet now the progressive left is seeking to force their view of marriage upon all Americans, regardless of their religious convictions.
One-man-one-woman marriage is building block of society
Ted Cruz has worked hard in defense of traditional marriage, including his intervention in a case protecting Texas marriage laws. In addition, he has fought on the federal level to defend marriage between one man and one woman as the fundamental building block of society.
When a state court granted a divorce to two homosexual men who had gotten a civil union in Vermont, Cruz intervened in defense of the Texas marriage laws, which successfully led to the court judgment being vacated;
Defended Texas’s marriage laws when a renegade state court attempted to grant a divorce to a same-sex couple who had obtained a civil union in Vermont
John Kasich: GM=N* / CU=Y*
For starters, Kasich opposes gay marriage. And as gay rights advocates push for stronger anti-discrimination laws in Columbus and in Washington, his aides will not say whether he supports these efforts, even as he preaches equality and respect.
“The court has ruled, and I said we’ll accept it,” Kasich said last week in Cleveland during the GOP’s first presidential debate, in response to a question about how he would explain his position on same-sex marriage to one of his daughters if she were gay.
**”And guess what, I just went to a wedding of a friend of mine who happens to be gay,” Kasich continued, drawing applause from a home-court audience at The Q
** I attended a gay wedding; accept the Supreme Court ruling
Ohio Gov. John Kasich announced his support for civil unions on Wednesday, but it didn’t last long.
** According to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Kasich, a Republican, told an Ohio television station he favored civil unions.
“I talked to Rob and encouraged him,” Kasich told the station when asked about Sen. Rob Portman’s endorsement of gay marriage. “If people want to have civil unions and have some way to transfer their resources, I’m for that. I don’t support gay marriage.”
**But a spokesman for the governor told the paper on Thursday that Kasich didn’t mean civil unions when he said civil unions.
“While he may have used the term ‘civil union’ loosely in this instance, he recognizes the existing rights of Ohioans to enter into private contracts to manage their personal property and health care issues,” Rob Nichols said. “The governor’s position is unchanged. He opposes gay marriage and opposes changing Ohio’s constitution to allow for civil unions.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/john-kasich-civil-unions-ohio-089210#ixzz3qMC0Qr54
Marco Rubio: GM=N* CU = ?
Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio said Wednesday he would **oppose a constitutional amendment allowing states to ban same-sex marriage after the Supreme legalized it nationwide, even though he disagrees with the landmark 5-4 decision.
**”I don’t support a constitutional amendment. I don’t believe the federal government should be in the marriage regulation business,” the Florida senator told reporters after a speech the Cedar Rapids Country Club in Iowa.
“There is no federal constitutional right to same sex marriage”
“I oppose gay marriage, but it’s the law of the land.”
Rubio says the Supreme Court decision on gay marriage is the law of the land. Rubio disagreed with the decision legalizing same-sex unions in all fifty states but said that Americans must abide by the ruling. Personally, Rubio says he believes marriage is between a man and a woman. Holding a nuanced position on Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Rubio believes some kinds of businesses, like wedding photography, should be allowed to turn away gay customers, and others, like hotels, should not.
Source: PBS News Hour “2016 Candidate Stands” series , Apr 13, 2015
“It’s not that I’m against gay marriage. I believe the definition of the institution of marriage should be between one man and one woman. States have always regulated marriage, and if states wants to have a different definition, you should petition the state legislature and have a political debate. I don’t think courts should be making that decision, and I don’t believe same-sex marriage is a constitutional right.”
“Sen. Marco Rubio believes gays and lesbians are born that way — but they don’t have a fundamental right to marry.”
Sen. Marco Rubio is out of step with a growing number of Republican voters on the issue of marriage equality, but he wants all of those people (and everybody else) to know he’s not a monster.
The presidential hopeful from Florida says he would attend the wedding for a gay friend, relative or colleague, despite his long-held belief that marriage is the exclusive partnership of a man and a woman.