Categories
Uncategorized

Rand Paul: Same-Sex Marriage ‘Offends’ Me

Isn’t Rand Paul supposed to be a Libertarian? And aren’t Libertarians supposed to believe in the primacy of individual judgment and freedom of choice in all issues? Then why did the Kentucky Senator say that same-sex marriage “offends” him? Oh, I know: Because he’s trying to curry favor with the right wing of the Republican Party as he begins his quest for the White House.

Speaking to Bret Baier of Fox News, Paul toed the GOP company line on the issue of gay marriage:

“I’m for traditional marriage. I think marriage is between a man and a woman. Ultimately, we could have fixed this a long time ago if we just allowed contracts between adults. We didn’t have to call it marriage, which offends myself and a lot of people.”

I guess Senator Paul didn’t stop to think of how offensive his comments would be to the millions of same-sex couples who are in committed, loving relationships across America and only seek to have the same rights as everyone else. After all, he has his eyes on the 2016 GOP nomination and knows that to support such a progressive idea would doom his chances. Best to abandon your Libertarian principles and join the others in your party who want to deny people a basic human right.

Ian Sams, a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, said Paul’s comments prove the Senator is just another GOP extremist:

“Saying marriage equality ‘offends’ him gives us yet another glimpse of Paul’s true colors — a restrictive, retro social agenda that sets back LGBT rights and questions longstanding gains in civil rights.”

Paul also said he thinks civil unions are the way the same-sex marriage issue will finally be resolved, which completely ignores the fact the that U.S. Supreme Court will rule on the matter later this year:

“But I think competing contracts that would give them equivalency before the law would have solved a lot of these problems and it may be where we’re still headed.”

I can’t speak for you, but personally I find Rand Paul’s narrow-minded view of this issue and his complete lack of knowledge on what is transpiring in the legal world to be highly offensive. But I’m not running for office, so I don’t have to bend over backwards to please the bigots in my political party.

This article was originally published by the same author at LiberalAmerica.org.

By Andrew Bradford

Proud progressive journalist and political adviser living behind enemy lines in Red America.

15 replies on “Rand Paul: Same-Sex Marriage ‘Offends’ Me”

Plagiarists offend me, opportunists offend me, misogynists offend me, liars offend me, psychopaths offend me, hypocrites offend _me_… but apart from bad-mouthing them and casting one vote there’s very little I can do regarding that offensiveness, where I _should_! You on the other hand have power to legislate policy effective to prosecute/persecute what offends you, where you _shouldn’t_! That is why you are a swine, Paul, on board with other swine, financed by swine, inspired by swine, and beholden to swine.

Rand Paul is no different than the others. His pronouncemens on social issues, women’s issues, LBGT issues, minority issues and immigration are just as backward as Ted Cruz. He just states them with more authority and less emotion in his libertarian bullshit way.

why does it offend u? do they force u to sit and watch them? i think wat offends you is YOUR imagination….wat YOU are thinking they are doing to each other….in fact….it SCARES you!

Well mr. paul rand, if that is all it takes to offend you I am very happy to do so. And in case you have not been paying attention for the last 10 to 15 years many democratic countries have not only espoused their LGBT citizens equal rights but have enshrined and honoured them in their constitutions. Millions of LGBT persons, their families, their friends and their allies have been happily offending you for over a decade and will be pleased to do so forever and ever, Amen.

I don’t often agree with Libertarians, but I also see no reason why the State should have to sanction marriage with a license. Recording marriages is a good idea, but licensing them? It doesn’t make sense.

Marriage has always been a civil union since the beginning, since Plymouth Rock. There does not have to be a religious ceremony. Rand Paul is the only republican running that I can bear except for Pataki. He has to appear that he is a conservative. I saw Bernie and Paul having a debate about healthcare, and Bernie clobbered him. BTW, Muslims and gays used to have a religious ceremony only, either in a Unitarian church or one that is equivalent.

To me that comment sounds like Rand Paul is saying that legal marriage of any kind offends him not that same sex marriage offends him. As a libertarian minded person I think government being in the business of legitimizing any marriage degrades it for everyone.

If something is a right then you should not have to ask the government for permission to exercise it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_license#United_States

Conservatives are pretty far gone when even the libertarians want to tell people how to live their lives. Clint Eastwood said it best, in an interview in GQ magazine in October, 2011. Even Clint thought libertarians had more sense than Rand Paul is showing now.

“These people who are making a big deal out of gay marriage?” Eastwood opined. “I don’t give a fuck about who wants to get married to anybody else! Why not?! We’re making a big deal out of things we shouldn’t be making a deal out of.”

“They go on and on with all this bullshit about ‘sanctity’ — don’t give me that sanctity crap! Just give everybody the chance to have the life they want.”

“I was an Eisenhower Republican when I started out at 21, because he promised to get us out of the Korean War. And over the years, I realized there was a Republican philosophy that I liked. And then they lost it. And libertarians had more of it. Because what I really believe is, let’s spend a little more time leaving everybody alone.”

You’re offended that he’s offended?

Okay.

Where’s the contradiction between believing in the primacy of individual judgment, and having an individual judgment that differs from yours?

It’s precisely someone who can have different opinions on such topics but still hold to libertarian values that is desirable.

A friend sent me this article link in email with the comment: Libertarian backlash.

I corrected him and I present this to others, who similarly may think that Rand Paul officially represents the true Libertarian perspectives:

No…Rand Paul backlash. Nothing more…

Got that broad brush out again?

Guys like him/things like this get the press because they are not true libertarians (the first line of the article is indicative):

Isn’t Rand Paul supposed to be a Libertarian? And aren’t Libertarians supposed to believe in the primacy of individual judgment and freedom of choice in all issues?

No. He’s not. Rand Paul is just an ‘auxiliary representative’ of the GOP. He’s falsely labeling himself as Libertarian to preserve the stranglehold of the two (one) party system. He’s a mouthpiece to sway the ignorant of our population (the majority) into thinking the Libertarians are ‘evil people’ that don’t believe in the happiness and love of others.

Do you really fall for the ruse that he is a / the true representative of Libertarianism???

The difference between Democrats / Republicans and libertarians is that libertarians can disagree with something and not have to legislate to stop it or force it on the people.

Big different in disagreing with something but understanding freedom is paramount vs legislating your personal belifs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *