After the recent SCOTUS decision, I’ve realized I’m lucky enough to have surrounded myself mainly with people who support LGBTQ+ rights. There are some people in this world whom I admire for their bigotry. Take Mike Huckabee for example: you’d think a 2016 presidential candidate would know better than to speak out against a positive gay marriage ruling, but you’d be wrong. I mean, even other prominent Republicans are starting to steer their political strategies away from “prevention” toward damage control.
Have a nice second shot at becoming president, Mike. It was funny while it lasted.
1. “May I ask, are we going to now discriminate against people of conscience, people of faith, who disagree with this ruling?”
This is kind of hilarious. I can’t even get mad. Do we pretend that those same people of faith haven’t been terrorizing queer communities for decades? Is it like, “you got yours, now we get ours”? That’s not how it works. like, at all.
Can Christians start harassing and discriminating against those who wear wool and linen together too? When will all followers of religion (point in case, there are religions that absolutely do outright call homosexuality a sin) own up to the fact that the SCOTUS ruling doesn’t even affect them unless they happen to be queer?
Since when did gay people existing threaten your religion?
2. “I’m not sure that every governor and every attorney general should just say, well, it’s the law of the land.”
You should talk to the people in Mississippi who’ve decided they might stop issuing marriage licenses altogether. I feel like you might get along, if you can overlook the irony that the opposition to gay marriage is actually the one disturbing the “sanctity of marriage” for straight people.
3. “If I become president, I just want to remind people that please don’t complain if I were to put a nativity scene out during Christmas and say, ‘If it’s my house, I get to do what I wish’.”
How many times do I have to say it? The White House is not “your house.” It’s our house. The people’s house. If you knew your history, you’d know that we’ve trashed the House before and sure could try again.
(Also, was this a dig at what Obama said to Jennicet? You really want to draw those parallels in a discussion against gay marriage…?)
4. “I will not acquiesce to an imperial court any more than our Founders acquiesced to an imperial British monarch. We must resist and reject judicial tyranny, not retreat.”
Oh my god. You’re literally vying for the position of president. If anyone in this country is a tyrant or a tyrant-enabler, it’s going to be you.
People wanting their right to get married is not tyranny. Literally nothing about the decision directly changes any part of your lifestyle. Besides, white, cis neo-liberal gays are too busy assimilating and the rest of us are too busy surviving, facing violence, and dying for there to be a gay agenda (as much as we wish otherwise…) Maslow’s theory of hierarchy, Mike, we need to fulfill our basic needs before we can start taking yours.
5. “I am faithful to the issue of marriage because it’s the Biblical position, the historical position, and the right position.”
This is literally Mike Huckabee right now. These reaches are crazy.
What part of banning gay marriage is “the historical position”? You mean like, we should take a consistent stance? Are you also suggesting the freeing of the slaves was wrong because it went against the “historical position”?
Besides, the Biblical position does not denote the majority decision. Last time I checked, your goal as Presidential candidate is to appeal to the most amount of people…Or the ones who can afford to back you, I guess. Can’t you get a read on the modern climate? C’mon, now.
6. “To argue same-sex marriage won’t affect anyone but those in a same-sex relationship is either naïve or just plain dishonest. It directly conflicts with the long-standing traditions and teachings of many faiths, setting up a collision with the First Amendment guarantee of religious liberty.”
Just because it conflicts with your way of life doesn’t mean that it disrupts it in any meaningful way. A lot of Americans don’t support support war but here we are, mostly unaffected and distanced from the harsh reality of it (sans those with family in other countries, etc…). If you refuse service to a gay person, you’re not being terrorized if they fine you. That’s literally a store owner manufacturing their own conflict.
7. “Let me be clear: When the Supreme Court abuses the limits of its power and attempts to create a right that doesn’t exist in the Constitution, it is the duty of the president to reject this threat to our religious liberty as “the law of the land.”
I cannot stress enough that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are political documents, not a moral ones. The point of the Constitution is to guarantee the rights of all American citizens, and you’re not doing yourself a favor by painting it in any other light. Don’t use the Constitution, a document created for the people, if you don’t even want to take a look around you and realize most of our citizens are at least minimally accepting of the LGBTQ+ community.