Posted on 11/13/2016 6:04:38 PM PST by Pinkbell
Donald Trump said he is “fine with” same-sex marriage but offered few specifics about his plans for the first 100 days of his administration during his first television interview since becoming the president-elect.
In an extensive interview with CBS’s Leslie Stahl broadcast Sunday night on "60 Minutes," Trump sought to ease the anxieties of LGBTQ Americans that a new conservative Supreme Court majority might overturn last year’s decision legalizing same-sex marriage.
Ducking a question about his personal view on the issue, which he dismissed as “irrelevant,” Trump asserted, bluntly, “it’s done.”
“These cases have gone to the Supreme Court. They’ve been settled. And I’m—I’m fine with that,” he said.
(Snip)
He acknowledged the possible reality of appointing a pro-life Supreme Court majority that could overturn Roe v. Wade. When pressed by Stahl, he agreed that some women will “perhaps have to go—they’ll have to go to another state.”
“And that’s okay?” Stahl responded.
“Well, we’ll see what happens,” Trump said. “It’s got a long way to go, just so you understand. That has a long, long way to go.”
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
“He doesn’t really care about same sex marriage.”
quite frankly,neither to i when compared to the literal survival of our county, such as halting the colonization of the U.S. with hundreds of thousands of godless Muslim goat herders challenged by flush toilets, unlimited illegal immigration on our southern border which destroys our wage levels and job markets, the future of our Constitution and Republic hinging on the next four appointments to the Supreme Court, the salvaging of our heath care system which hinges on the repeal and replacement of obamacare, the repatriation of millions of jobs from overseas in order to give our people jobs that pay wages sufficient to buy the stuff they make, the whole issue of rule of law, and about a million other issues more important than same sex marriage.
Thoughts ... he’s learning! When we get the new supreme court judges in there ... then ... “we’ll see” won’t we?
It’s going to be tough for a guy who’s been married 3 times to argue that Gay marriage will destroy the sanctity of marriage.
I saw this. I heard what he said.
What I think I saw was some discomfort with the question and Trump seemed to try to avoid giving a specific answer.
IMO, he has other things on his plate that are a much higher priority. I also think he may leave this for later, maybe to the American people rather than the SC, maybe to the states, maybe to the legislature? At any rate, I don’t think this is where he wants to focus his attention. I also think he doesn’t want to stir up a lot of additional and unnecessary animosity. He has enough to battle right now.
Some you of guys are not very bright. If Trump is going to put right to life jurists on the Supreme Court, you can bet these same jurists likely will overturn same sex marriage. It was not Trump who created these liberal constructs and it will take time to unwind them.
I am so thankful President-elect Trump won. I can not begin to fathom the utter despair we would be experiencing, had HRC won.
God gave us a miracle here, and will guide DJT as He wills, whether President-elect Trump realizes it or not. And I think he does.
I’m hoping we stay unified and hopeful and in prayer right through to January 20 (and beyond), and then help our President restore this nation.
This should be the last MSM press availability for Trump.
This is going to be their game.....”he didn’t mean it, and we were all lied to”
Until he’s inaugurated, he should work silently with his policy teams, and tell his staff and ‘insiders’ to STFU. The MSM has no interest on informing the public. They are only setting traps to try and weaken Trump. To them, the war is now in the 2nd stage.
bingo...you could tell Trump is against same sex marriage but did not want to step on the hornets nest and did the diplomatic thing...
Also think gays are going to have huge legal bills from marriage.
1. Divorce. Extremely expensive. Basis for divorce is adultery. Do gays play by those rules?
2. Palimony. Gays living together for years in California. Now that’s common law marriage.
I’m not sure this is the battle to fight at this point.
I hope his DOJ goes after any state entity that violated the Civil Rights of any bakers, florists, etc.
Make them pay those peoples fines back X 100
Leslie Stahl’s inept questioning let him off the hook completely.
Proper follow-up question: “So if Congress passes a bill to ban same-sex ‘marriage,’ will you sign it?”
Luckily she’s a dumb reporter and appears to think that SCOTUS is the final say on everything.
Neither is his daughter. She and her husband were very much Dems before this election
But that’s okay. If they can get some of our mess straightened out I will take it;
I am against gay marriage..civil unions are another matter. It has been decided by the Supreme Court,,at least for now. Why stir up a hornets nest? There are some more pressing problems than the social issues at the moment, although in some respects they are intertwined. But that is for another day.
I am fine with his answer. He is president of all us Americans. If the gay wants to join the fight in saving the country and quit worrying whom they screw perhaps we will get somewhere.
I agree, that is what I heard too. This issue is way down the list for now, as there has already been a decision. Maybe down the road it will be addressed again, but it isn't even newsworthy right now. It boils down to just an opinion, and Trump doesn't need to offer his opinion since it surely will be unpopular with one group or another and not make any difference at all.
I think what we WILL see with Trump is addressing things like cake decorators not decorating cakes for gay weddings and such, basically religious liberty issues.
That is pretty much where I am. I voted against it but it has been overturned. Where I hope President Trump will help is through the appointment of justices that will protect church’s religious rights.
If grown adults choose to mock God and His creation, they will answer for it not me.
If Donald Trump doesn't believe in protecting the rights of a bakery owner who refuses to make a wedding cake for a gay couple, then all of the prayers and sacrifices we've made on his behalf have been a waste of time.
Because it really didn't matter how "conservative" the mayors of Sodom and Gomorrah were on other issues, at the end of the day.
There can be a conservative solution to this:
* homosexuals can get married 2 people only like heterosexuals
BUT
* you don’t get preference in adoptions
* the state doesn’t have to pay for you to use in vitro fertilization or any other tech to make a baby
* no polygamy regardless of genders involved
* no transgenders in the military, no homosexuals in straight units
* no transgenders getting rights over normal people
* counseling for gender dysphoria gets legalized again for all levels
* counseling for a child with same sex attraction but doesn’t want to, whether due to molestation or religious reasons, is made legal again in states where it isn’t right now
* counselors who don’t want to counsel same sex relationships can refuse such
* medical professionals lose the gag order where someone saying they are the opposite gender can only be referred for hormones and surgery
* the government changes its contract preferences to stop using the Out and Equal Index and similar far left metrics as a measure of “LBGT diversity”, so that companies no longer socially engineer the workforce to get preference for contracts - and this is something Trump can do via Executive Order just as it was put in place by Obama
Lord help me for having to say this, I don’t care about two men getting married - I care about keeping the mentally ill biologically intact men out of the girls’ locker room, women’s changing room, women’s dorm and shelters.
Let them get married as a two-some and leave me alone.
It is saying I have to celebrate your blasphemy or endorse someone else’s delusion that is the bigger problem.
There are already two states whose Civil Rights Commissions are trying to argue states are public accommodations if they do anything other than have service.
So if you host potlucks or Scouts or American Heritage Girls, Massachusetts and Iowa are trying to say you have to follow federal transgender guidelines.
So you have to let boys into the girls’ troop and stay on their spend the nights, you have to let men with delusions into the women’s shelter, and you can’t complain if a man in the dress uses the women’s bathroom.
In both cases, the Civil Rights Commissions were even saying that the churches could be sued if there was an atmosphere of intimidation - if the church didn’t censor its members, it could be sued.
"He acknowledged the possible reality of appointing a pro-life Supreme Court majority that could overturn Roe v. Wade. When pressed by Stahl, he agreed that some women will “perhaps have to go—they’ll have to go to another state.”
This is why I’ve been questioning Trump’s knowledge of Congress’s constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers in other threads. But I’ll also include the 19th Amendment in this example, that amendment uniquely giving the feds the specific power to strengthen sex-related rights, but only in the context of voting issues.
Regarding gay marriage and abortion, the bottom line is this where the constitutionally limited powers of the feds come into play. Even if Trump, all members of the RINO-controlled Congress, and all Supreme Court justices were pro-gay “marriage” and pro-aborion, so what?
What patriots have been slow to wise up to is this. The constitutional reality is that the states have never expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds the specific power to regulate marriage or abortion, these issues uniquely 10th Amendment-protected state power issues. So any official federal action, including executive orders or actions, taken for or against theses issues is unconstitutional.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
With all due respect to frat houses, the feds have been acting like drunk frat boys running the country.
This is why I’ve been arguing that constitutionally low-information Trump is probably in “wrong way Riegels” mode.
Roy Riegels wrong way run in the Rose Bowl
Patriots need to steer Trump in the direction of Section 8 so that he can at least get the corrupt feds out of the marriage and abortion businesses.
Consider that millions of unborn children have died because patriots have been asleep at the wheel with respect to getting a grip on the fed’s constitutionally limited powers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.