Mike Huckabee Asked to Explain Negative Impact of Same-Sex Marriage – Proceeds to Embarrass Himself

mike huckabee 1The gay marriage “debate” is one that seems to never end. I use the word “debate” mockingly, because there’s not really a debate at all. Our First Amendment clearly says that laws in this country cannot be based on religionperiod. Being that bans on same-sex marriage are completely derived from religious beliefs, they are unconstitutional. And, yes, it really is just that simple.


One of the biggest opponents to marriage equality has been former Fox News personality Mike Huckabee. In fact, it seems as if he’s making discrimination against homosexuals the cornerstone of his probable 2016 presidential bid.

Well, while at a summit in Iowa (a state where same-sex marriage has been legal since 2009), Think Progress asked Huckabee how same-sex marriage have negatively impacted that state.

And… he couldn’t answer the question. Instead, he just offered some embarrassing “political talk” that completely avoided the question and essentially proved that there aren’t any negative impacts to marriage equality.

“Iowans voted differently than the judges ruled, so you’ve got a conflict between the people and the judges,” he said. “Ultimately, most states have made clear their position on it. The battle hasn’t been with the people. The battle has been with a handful of people in black robes.”

Using that “logic,” I guess he would have apparently opposed the Civil Rights Act considering how desegregation, legalized interracial marriage and equal rights for African-Americans were not popular among “the people” in the South. Ending slavery wasn’t popular with them either, by the way. Just because bigotry exists in plurality among a grouping of people, doesn’t mean that it has precedence over Constitutional rule.

But the fact he couldn’t even cite one area where same-sex marriage (five years after its legalization) had negatively impacted Iowa speaks volumes to the ignorance behind his (and others with similar views) opposition to marriage equality.

It has nothing to do with society, it’s all about their own personal – and unconstitutional – desires to force their religious views on others.


But to be perfectly honest, I’m at a point where I’m absolutely sick and tired of talking about this. Not because I don’t believe homosexuals have the right to marry, but because it’s so obvious that conservatives have lost this fight – yet we’re still having to waste time dealing with their nonsense. How many times do these bans need to get overturned in court before conservatives finally admit that they lost?

Because while the Supreme Court is set to rule on same-sex marriage soon, which should end this debate once and for all – it won’t. Republican state legislatures are going to do just about everything they can to try to find loopholes to avoid allowing same-sex marriages to be held within their states.

Just look at what they’ve done with abortion. They can’t outright ban it, so they’ve passed laws and rules making it nearly impossible to have one in many “red states.” That’s pretty much what you can expect following the Supreme Court’s decision that’s almost certainly going to rule that same-sex marriage bans are unconstitutional.

So, while I have the utmost confidence that the Supreme Court is going to rule that bans on same-sex marriages are unconstitutional, I’m not at all confident in that being the end to this fight. If there’s one thing I’m sure of, it’s that conservative are going to believe what they want to believe, even if our Constitution and our Supreme Court clearly say that they’re wrong.




Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • RabidVT

    The fringe candidates like the Huckster know they can never win a national election. They are positioning themselves for their next entertainment/lobbying role and need an audience to follow them. They write vapid books, give incoherent speeches and attend rallies to whip the faithful into a froth. Their only concern is that they are not forgotten.

  • Damien Vukovic

    It is only the religious that are afraid of gay people & no one takes them seriously any longer.

  • MJ

    Your argument would do better if you would ditch the term “homosexual” when referring to gay people. It’s like using the term “coloured” to refer to people of African heritage. It’s that archaic and just as insulting.

    • David

      I am literally both gay and black and I couldn’t possibly care less. These words do not inhibit his argument in any way. A homosexual is just someone who is attracted to the same sex.
      Archaic? Maybe. Insulting? Absolutely not.