Or "How you can tell that Dr. Carson is not a politician":
Tea party Republican and potential 2016 presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson told CNN's Chris Cuomo on Tuesday that being gay is a choice, an example being straight people who emerge from prison as homosexuals.
During a discussion about same-sex marriage rights, Cuomo asked Carson if, as with slavery, gay marriage needed to be corrected in the Constitution as a form of equal protection. Carson replied that there's no comparison between the two.
"You can't just say because it happened that way this time, this is the same situation, it's not the same situation," he said, "because people have no control over their race, for instance."
Cuomo then asked if Carson believed people had control over their sexuality and if being gay was a choice. "Absolutely," said Carson.
"A lot of people who go into prison go into prison straight, and when they come out, they're gay," Carson said. "So, did something happen while they were in there? Ask yourself that question."
Amazing the freedom you have to answer Cuomo's loaded "questions" honestly and correctly when you have no actual chance at the 2016 GOP nomination, huh?
And yes, the doc dragged the Constitution into the "discussion" as well - sort of:
The issue of gay marriage should be left to the States, according to Carson, and providing legal rights to same-sex couples can be done without changing the legal definition of marriage.
"Why do gay people want to get married? Why do they say they want to get married? Because they want to have various rights — property rights, visitation rights," he said.
"Why can't any two human beings, I don't care what their sexual orientation is, why can't they have the legal right to do those things? That does not require changing the definition of marriage."
Actually, there is no enumerated power granted to the federal government the States that mentions or even hints at marriage definition. As such, and in the absence of any such constitutional amendment, it falls within the Tenth Amendment's, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the People". And, indeed, the argument can be made that even State and local governments have no business "defining" marriage, and have only really heavily gotten into that "business" as a direct result of homosexual extremists' drive to hijack the marriage institution. Which, in turn, gives the lie to the idea of "legal rights [for] same-sex 'couples' can be done without changing the legal definition of marriage," because the latter is the whole point of the exercise, while the former is merely a by-product of it.
Which is how you can tell that, though Dr. Carson isn't a politician, he is running for president, as evinced by his retreat from his devastatingly on-target 2013 comparison of homosexuality to pedophilia and beastiality in the context of cultural debasement "envelope-pushing". And which, in turn, is why, if he'd ever had a legit shot at the presidency, that would have extinguished it, because such moral issues candor will stick to him for ever, like leprosy.
Exit question: Will this eliminate Dr. Carson as a Surgeon-General candidate of President Walker, if and when?
No comments:
Post a Comment