Connect with us

Marco Rubio: ‘I’ve Never Supported A Federal Constitutional Amendment On Marriage.’ Really?



Marco Rubio today claims he has never supported a federal amendment to the constitution on marriage. Is that true?

In a quick interview with MSNBC this morning, Marco Rubio said he believes the states should have the right to define marriage as they choose. The GOP presidential candidate, who does not support marriage equality and initially stumbled by saying “sex” instead of “marriage” when talking about same-sex couples, also offered up an interesting statement. “I’ve never supported a federal constitutional amendment on marriage.”

Really? If that’s true, the record says otherwise. And if that’s true, did he try to correct the record?

There’s a line, of course, between being so anti-gay that enshrining bigotry into our founding documents seems like a good idea, and being anti-gay but conceding the issue to the states – not that marriage should be left to the states.

While the Florida freshman Senator may or may not have ever “supported a federal constitutional amendment on marriage,” the record certainly appears to show he did.

A 2010 Voters Guide published by the Christian Coalition, a far right religious organization, puts Rubio’s position on the issue of a “Federal Marriage Amendment to prevent same sex marriage” as “Supports.” An asterisk is next to his position, which the Christian Coalition states designates:

“When possible, positions of candidates on issues were verified or determined using voting records and/or public statements.”


On the other side of the political spectrum, in an undated article that was published at least by October 3, 2010, the People For The American Way write:

“Rubio is opposed to repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell – which puts him at odds with three quarters of the American people. He opposes the freedom to marry for gay couples and supports a federal constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage in any state.”

LOOK: Marco Rubio’s Top 10 Anti-Gay Statements

In August of 2010, before Rubio was elected to the U.S. Senate, CNN interviewed his challenger, Charlie Christ. Here’s how reporter Ed Henry began a question on same-sex marriage:

“Another big issue, same-sex marriage. Many conservatives like Marco Rubio support a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage…”

One year earlier, in 2009, Rubio told Slate’s Christopher Beam that he wasn’t talking about same-sex marriage because no one else was, but offered up this “position,” if you will, on a federal marriage amendment that would ban same-sex couples from marrying: “I have mixed feelings about that.”

By 2013 Senator Rubio may have take the position that marriage should be left to the states, but he did not have that belief solidified when he was running for the U.S. Senate three years earlier.

And if he never supported a federal amendment to the U.S. Constitution defining marriage, it would appear he also never tried to correct the record – or disabuse those who thought he did – of that perception, which worked to his advantage.

Senator Rubio’s campaign was contacted for comment on this article but did not immediately respond.

In an article published after this one, MSNBC’s Benjy Sarlin adds this supporting statement:

Reached by msnbc for comment, a Christian Coalition spokeswoman confirmed that had Rubio filled out a candidate survey in 2010 when he was running for the Senate in Florida and attested to the voter guide’s accuracy, which she said was rigorously checked against candidate’s questionnaires, votes, and public statements.”


Image: Screenshot via MSNBC 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.


Madison Cawthorn Retains High-Powered GOP Attorney for Case Seeking to Disqualify Him as an Insurrectionist



U.S. Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-NC) is facing several six challengers to his seat in the House of Representatives this year. Two Democrats will face off, with one becoming their party’s nominee. Four Republicans are primarying the far-right freshman lawmaker, one of those five will go on to face the Democratic challenger.

But Congressman Cawthorn is facing an even great challenge, and he’s taking it seriously.

A group of attorneys is looking at both the 14 Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and North Carolina law, in an attempt to have him declared an insurrectionist and therefore unfit to serve.

“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress,” the 14th Amendment reads, “who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress…shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

The New York Times Tuesday night reports “Mr. Cawthorn, 26, who is in his first term in Congress, has denounced the case as an egregious misreading of the 14th Amendment, but he has retained James Bopp Jr., one of the most prominent conservative campaign lawyers in the country, as counsel.”

Bopp, known as being one of the attorneys who won the democracy-damning Citizens United case at the Supreme Court, flooding American politics with millions (billions?) in dark money. He’s also been a vice-chair of the RNC, and is recognized as a top conservative lawyer.

The Times adds that “North Carolina’s election statute offers challengers a remarkably low bar to question a candidate’s constitutional qualifications for office. Once someone establishes a ‘reasonable suspicion or belief’ that a candidate is not qualified, the burden shifts to the officeseeker to prove otherwise.”

Other Republicans are likely worried, which should have some wondering who’s footing the bill for Bopp.

“If Mr. Cawthorn is labeled an ‘insurrectionist,’ that could have broader ramifications. Other Republican House members, such as Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Mo Brooks of Alabama, Paul Gosar of Arizona, and Lauren Boebert of Colorado, face similar accusations, but their state’s election laws present higher hurdles for challenges to their candidate qualifications. If one of their colleagues is disqualified for his role in encouraging the rioters, those hurdles might become easier to clear.”

Read the entire Times report here.



Continue Reading


Chasten Buttigieg Slams Florida GOP’s ‘Don’t Say Gay’ Bill for ‘Pushing LGBTQ Families Back Into the Closet’



Former school teacher Chasten Buttigieg is slamming Florida legislation dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, which would ban discussion of LGBTQ issues in public schools under the guise of “parental rights,” saying it will “kill kids.”

Appearing on CNN Buttigieg asked, “what kind of country we’re building, or in Florida, what kind of state are you building where you’re essentially pushing kids back into the closet, you’re saying we can’t talk about you? We can’t even talk about your families.”

“And you know, as a kid who grew up for 18 years, being told, ‘you don’t belong, something about you is wrong.’ Sometimes you take that trauma to heart and unfortunately there are a lot of kids in this country who do the worst because we tell them, ‘something about you is twisted and you don’t belong here.'”

Buttigieg railed against the bill over the weekend, posting a tweet pointing to a Trevor Project study that he says found “42% of LGBTQ youth seriously considered attempting suicide last year.”

The bill, sponsored by freshman Republican state Rep. Joe Harding, in part reads: “A school district may not encourage classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in primary grade levels or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students.”

Buttigieg, who is married to Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, said, “if kids come into the classroom Monday morning, and they’re all talking about their weekends, and hypothetically a kid like mine says, ‘I had the best weekend with my dad. We went to the zoo, we went and got ice cream,’ is the teacher supposed to say, ‘hey, we don’t talk about things like that in this classroom’? You know, and not only what does that do to kids like mine, but also do to a kid in the classroom [who is] starting to realize that they’re different.”


Image by Pete for America via Flickr

Continue Reading


Psaki Schools Doocy on Trump’s Infamous Twitter Tantrums After He Whines About ‘Hashtag’ Diplomacy



White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki responded to a question from Fox News correspondent Peter Doocy on Tuesday by reminding him that former President Donald Trump had a history of conducting diplomacy through tantrums on Twitter.

At a White House press briefing, Doocy asked why Secretary of State Antony Blinken had expressed support for Ukraine on Twitter with the hashtag “#IStandWithUkraine.”

“Has that ever worked in stopping an authoritarian regime from doing anything, a hashtag?” Doocy wondered.

“I will have to say that, unlike the last administration, we don’t think Twitter is the only means of engaging or negotiating or discussing important topics,” Psaki replied. “But it is important for us to convey to the Ukrainian people who do view commentary through a range of forums.”

Watch the video below from Fox News.


Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.