Rick Perry got into trouble with the Teavangelists when he said that the states should decide whether to allow same-sex marriage, not the federal government. So listen to this amusing attempt to extricate himself from the problem:
I asked spokesman Mark Miner if Perry still held held to his view that states should be allowed to decide the issue of gay marriage. He said, “Governor Perry is personally opposed to gay marriage, and worked in Texas to pass a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Governor Perry supports a federal Defense of Marriage amendment, but until that passes, Governor Perry support states’ ability to protect themselves with laws that define marriage between a man and women. Most importantly, Governor Perry believes we cannot support gay marriage being imported to other states against their will — where those states are forced to recognize gay marriages licensed in other states. That’s why a federal amendment — which requires a majority of states to ratify — is in order.”
Jennifer Rubin points out the obvious:
There are two problems with that. First, Perry said in his book that he’d support states’ ability to pass gay marriage; now he’s saying he’d support their desire to protect themselves against it. And second, in his book and in statements at the Aspen Institute, he never referred to a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. In fact, he suggested that it was a positive thing in and of itself to allow states to choose rules for themselves. This answer, if not challenged, may fly. But Santorum will no doubt be ready to pounce in the next debate.
The funny thing is that Perry claims that he isn’t backing off anything he wrote in his book even by “one inch.” Anyone who can think at even a 1st grade level knows otherwise.
Like Dispatches on Facebook: