In an exclusive interview with The Brody File, Senator Rand Paul says when it comes to traditional marriage he’s, “not kind of willing to give up on it yet.” Paul also discusses his idea of potentially eliminating the word marriage out of the tax code. He explains his reasons below.
The Brody File spent a couple days with Rand Paul and his family down in Kentucky. Rand Paul’s wife (Kelley Paul) sat for the interview as well at their home in Bowling Green Kentucky.
The national profile on him (including an interview with his wife) aired on The 700 Club Thursday. Watch here
Also, watch our Brody File show this week where we devote the entire thirty minutes to our Rand Paul coverage. Watch here
Mandatory Courtesy for Video Clips: CBN News/The Brody File
David Brody: Do you think you could ever get there in terms of being a supporter of same-sex marriage at some point? I know you believe in traditional marriage."
Senator Rand Paul: “I think that we've got a long history with marriage. I'm not kind of willing to give up on it yet. The family unit, even above and beyond America and before America, the family unit is something that has come about for thousands of years. We’ve had a family structure and I think it’s an important structure. Not everybody in the country is going to agree with me on that. There are people and young people seem to be changing their opinions but I think we should still be in favor of what we’re in favor of and that is that there’s a traditional family unit and that it’s important. The law is going to somewhat different in the sense that where marriage is adjudicated, whether it’s at the federal level or the state level, we’ve always had marriage certificates and we’ve had them at the state level. If we keep it that way, maybe we can still have the discussion go on without making the decision to go all the way one way or all the way the other way because I think right now if we say we believe in a federally mandated one man/one woman marriage we’re going to lose that battle because the country is going the other way right now. If we were to say each state can decide I think a good 25-30 states still do believe in traditional marriage and maybe we allow the debate to go on for another couple decades and see if we can still win back the hearts and minds of people.”
Senator Rand Paul: “I think for the Republican Party maybe we do have to acknowledge that there are going to be people in some of these states that we’re not winning and that we’re going to have to acknowledge that, for example New York has decided this issue, and whether or not we’re going to agree to allow Republicans to come into the Party that may disagree with us. I think there are people, like I say my wife and I don’t agree on every issue so there’s going to be some nuance as to where we are on all these issues but I think it’s still important to state what you believe in and I think it is important. Traditional marriage is important. It is a rock upon which a lot of things are built.”
David Brody: “Could you clarify what you said the other day about contracts that you don’t have a problem with letting people, you don’t want to restrict people from entering into contracts. What did you mean by that?”
Senator Rand Paul: “For example, if you’re not married, I don’t know what kind of relationship it is, let’s say you want to leave your money to someone else, you obviously have the right to make a contract. Let’s say you have no kids to leave your money to someone else. Let’s say you’re sick and in the hospital and you have no family by a traditional marriage but you want to have a contract that says this is my immediate family and I want them to have privilege to see me in the hospital. All of those things I think can be worked out by contracts. Some of the things that are more difficult, and I think the federal government is going to probably rule that you can’t exclude contracts that people make in a non-traditional way from things like benefits, health benefits and things like that. I think it’s different if it’s the government though than if it’s private. So let’s say for example I own Hobby Lobby and I’m an evangelical Christian and I don’t want to have my insurance go for abortion, I think that’s your right. Let’s say I don’t want to have insurance for non-traditional marriage. That is your right. So we do have to kind of separate. If the court goes towards saying you can’t do these things we do need to separate what is government and what is the private sphere because when it’s your sphere and it’s your private business I think you do have the absolute right to decide well, I think abortion is wrong and I don’t want my hard earned work and my labor to go towards paying for abortion for me or my employees. That should be your right as an employer.”
David Brody: “Is there a solution? You talked the other day about just eliminating the word marriage out of the federal lexicon?”
Senator Rand Paul: “It can. There’s nothing that says that absolutely you have to have marriage involved in the tax code. What I’ve started thinking about is that if the country seems to be going the other way, I don't also want the government to make it part of governmental policy that same-sex marriage is the thing that government is saying ok that's fine. If society is heading that way, why don't we have the government not talk so much about marriage. Let's still try and convince people what we believe in for traditional marriage but try to make the tax code more neutral on some of these issues. I think the government is going to mandate that the Supreme Court is likely to mandate that things that come from federal government are not going to be allowed to discriminate between traditional and non-traditional marriage and I think as a consequence then let’s try not to have a government on some policies, tax policies, benefit policies not be involved in the marriage issue.”