Shapiro Host: No Such Thing As Same-Sex Marriage

This is what we face.   Right wing media simply claims same sex marriages cannot be a thing, and it goes along with red states use don’t say gay laws.   They want to erase the public acceptance LGBTQ+ people have worked hard to get.   As I said before marriage is a legal contract between people and confers state and federal legal benefits.   What words mean changes over time and can be broadened when needed.    Marriage is not owned by religion.   Why do these people work so hard to destroy the rights of the LGBTQ+ that doesn’t affect them in anyway?   They are kids crossing their arms and stomping their feet saying they don’t like it.   Hugs

 

“What I suspect it is is that Marco Rubio doesn’t think that gay marriage is real. I think Marco Rubio believes that marriage is between a man and a woman and that there is no such thing as same-sex marriage.

“It’s just that Pete Buttigieg isn’t really married. And it’s hard — I know it’s hard to say that in our politically correct culture. But it’s not because two guys can’t be married to each other.

“Marriage is the union of a man to his wife. A perpetual union of a man to his wife for the sake of the generation and the education of children. That’s what it is. And that’s not possible between two men and two women.

“Marriage essentially has sexual difference at the heart of it. And so, if we call things that don’t have that marriage, we don’t expand marriage, we just get rid of marriage.

“If Pete Buttigieg and Chasten can be married, then marriage has no concrete meaning.” – Daily Wire host Michael Knowles, who also co-hosts Ted Cruz’s podcast.

https://www.mediamatters.org/media/3991429/embed/embed

https://www.mediamatters.org/media/3991429/embed/embed

 

   

BeccaM • 16 hours ago • edited

The “founders” would’ve been shocked that we did away with slavery, after going to war over it.

They would’ve been shocked to learn women were granted the right to vote, along with non-white men.

They’d have been shocked to discover we now not only had a permanent standing army, but it receives the lion’s share of the discretionary federal budget.

They’d have been shocked to find out we have rifles which can fire dozens of rounds a minute and are capable of literally shredding the human body. (And that we did not ban them for civilian possession and use.)

And they would have been completely flabbergasted to hear that we had an unfit and manifestly unqualified criminal President who launched a violent coup and threatened the lives of his Vice President and members of Congress so he could stay in power after losing his reelection—and we didn’t immediately arrest and imprison the treasonous, seditious motherfucker.

Joe in NM BeccaM • 16 hours ago

And they would be shocked to learn that a major party wants “religion” as a central theme.

ECarpenter Joe in NM • 13 hours ago

They would be shocked that there is a de facto two party system – they explicitly didn’t want political parties to form.

SilentMike BeccaM • 16 hours ago • edited

… and inter-racial marriage also comes immediately to mind as something they’d be shocked by.

BensNewLogin • 17 hours ago

They made the same stupid arguments during the marriage wars.

Houndentenor BensNewLogin • 16 hours ago

And they never stopped believing those things. Did people think that just because they lost in Windsor and Obergefell that they would just give up and quit. They didn’t give up on overturning Roe and they won’t give up on overturning gay marriage either. They never give up. It’s the lesson the left never seems to learn. You don’t win your rights and then you can stop fighting. You win your rights and you have to keep fighting for them so long as there’s any opposition and at least in my lifetime there always will be.

K Elmquist BensNewLogin • 16 hours ago

I’m surprised he didn’t mention marriage was divinely inspired. As well, using his argument that marriage is for the procreation of children would mean that all those married heterosexual couples that either can’t or have chosen not to have children aren’t married either.

Brian Penicook BensNewLogin • 16 hours ago

So straight marriages that have no kids are not real either. I want to punch this guy. I’m pretty sure that’s not the right thing. Don’t like the second class, third rate status we enjoy.

ErnestMc BensNewLogin • 16 hours ago

Yes, those of us who have been involved with the marriage-equality fight have heard all these idiotic arguments 1000 times (and they’ve been shot down 1000 times), yet the bigots always think they’re the first to come up with them.

Randy503 BensNewLogin • 14 hours ago

I still argue with people about this. They claim we aren’t “really” married. I say, it doens’t matter what you think — we are LEGALLY married. You don’t have to believe it’s valid, or like it, or approve of it. And if we are not REALLY married, then why are you trying so hard to ban something that doenst’ exist? That always stumps them.

gyges Randy503 • 14 hours ago

Marriage is what the state says. Windsor proved the IRS and DOMA could not override state laws about inheritance. Obergefell expanded on this to say that if DOMA could not restrict the IRS, then “full faith and credit” required states to respect same-sex marriages, which should thus be available everywhere.

No religious leader informally deputized to act as an officiant or witness to legal marriages is required to marry people he or she does not want to marry.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.