Republicans, it’s no longer 1950. But, if you continue to take positions that are held by only those born in 1950, like opposition to marriage equality, you are destined to go the way of the dinosaur. So how are the Republican presidential candidates doing on last week’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling on marriage equality? If this were school, what mark would they get? You be the judge.
Wisconsin governor and presidential candidate Scott Walker stated: “The only next approach for those who are supporters of marriage being defined as between one man and one woman is to consider pursuing a constitutional amendment.” So here’s his problem with that. First, that approach is hypocritical as, when marriage equality came to Wisconsin, he conceded that the marriage issue was over. But now he’s taking another stance. That’s not to mention that a constitutional amendment would take the support of 38 states. You do the math. And really, when was the last time we had a constitutional amendment?
Then there’s my favorite, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, who became apoplectic after the ruling. He first stated the decision was unconstitutional, then suggested states should ignore it. Here’s what I’d say to that: Senator, you claim you always keep a copy of the Constitution in your suit pocket. Would you please read it? If you really knew the Constitution, you’d note that the Supreme Court has the right to interpret and rule on the Constitution and our rights. Its rulings are the law of the land, whether we like them or not. So your comments either show an ignorance of the law and the Constitution, or you’re blatantly asking people to ignore the law. I guess we should expect that from a guy born outside of the United States. Can you show us your birth certificate, please?
No other Republican presidential candidate voiced even a hint of support for the SCOTUS ruling — though Americans now overwhelmingly support marriage equality. Are the Republicans destined to become irrelevant?