arget="_blank"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">

Rand Paul on Civil Rights

Rand Paul on Civil Rights Republican Kentucky Senator





Disagrees with Libertarians & Hillary Clinton on gay rights

Hillary is a liberal and not a progressive (Barack Obama and Senator Elizabeth Warren are progressives). If Hillary were progressive, she would be more anti-corporate (more like Elizabeth Warren); and if Hillary were progressive, she would be more opposed to military intervention overseas (more like Rand Paul!).

Resist government imposing religious views of marriage

PAUL: Look, I don't want my marriage or my guns registered in Washington. And if people have an opinion, it's a religious opinion that is heartly felt, obviously they should be allowed to practice that and no government should interfere with them. One of the things that really got to me was the thing in Houston where you had the government, the mayor actually, trying to get the sermons of ministers. When the government tries to invade the church to enforce its own opinion on marriage, that's when it's time to resist.

Source: Fox News/Facebook Top Ten First Tier debate transcript , Aug 6, 2015

Marriage for heterosexuals; contracts for same-sex couples

PAUL: I do believe people ought to be left alone. I am a "leave me alone" kind of guy.

Q: But not when it comes to marriage?

PAUL: Well, no. States will end up making the decisions on these things. I think that there's a religious connotation to marriage that has been going on for thousands of years I still want to preserve that. But I also believe people ought to be treated fairly under the law. I see no reason why, if the marriage contract conveys certain things, that if [a woman] wants to marry another woman, they can do that and have a contract. You could have traditional marriage, and then you could also have the neutrality of the law that allows [same-sex couples] to have contracts with one another.

Source: CNN SOTU 2015 interviews of 2016 presidential hopefuls , Apr 12, 2015

Stand up for Bill of Rights against federal usurpation

I have made it my priority to reassert the rights and privileges of the individual by standing up for the entire Bill of Rights. Our Federal Government has grown out-of-control and we must return it to its constitutionally enumerated powers. I believe that America can successfully protect itself against potential national security threats without sacrificing our inalienable rights

We must fiercely guard our Bill of Rights. I will continue to fight for the Constitution, individual liberty and the freedoms that make this country great.

I don't believe in rights based on your behavior

But it's unclear how far--and to whom--Paul extends the argument that rights cannot be defined by behavior. Practicing religion, for example, is a behavior enshrined in the Bill of Rights, , as is the behavior of free speech. Does Paul believe those behaviors are protected rights?

A Paul spokesperson said the rights that count are those in the country's founding charter. "He does not classify rights based on behavior, but rather recognizes rights for all, as our Constitution defines it. Sen. Paul is the biggest proponent for protecting the Bill of Rights, which, as you know, protects the rights of all Americans as stated in our Constitution."

Source: Buzzfeed.com 2015 coverage of 2016 presidential hopefuls , Mar 31, 2015

Gay contracts ok, but gay marriage is offensive

Paul continued, "I think having competing contracts that would give them equivalency before the law would have solved a lot of these problems, and it may be where we're still headed."

For Paul's vision of equal rights for same-sex couples through contracts to become a reality, the first step would be have to be a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court in June upholding state prohibitions on gay nuptials.

Source: Washington Blade 2015 coverage of 2016 presidential hopefuls , Mar 7, 2015

OpEd: Disagrees with Libertarian Party on social issues

Issue Libertarian Party Rand Paul Abortion: No laws for or against abortion Life begins at conception Gay marriage: No laws for or against homosexuality Don't redefine marriage Free Trade agreements: No laws for or against free trade Use incentives on agreements Campaign Finance Reform: No laws for or against donation limits Restrict lobbyists & PACs

Don't register guns federally, nor marriages

What about rapidly-changing opinions on the matter? He took a soft tone. "Society's changing," he said. "People change their minds all the time on this issue, and even within the Republican Party, there are people whose child turns out to be gay and they're like, 'maybe I want to rethink this issue.' So it's been rethought. The President's rethought the issue. A lot of people have rethought the issue."

Was Paul hinting that he, too, could change his thinking? He said, "I believe in old-fashioned traditional marriage. But, I don't really think the government needs to be too involved with this, and I think that the Republican Party can have people on both sides of the issue."

"You could rethink it at some point, too?" I asked. He shrugged. It wasn't a yes or a no.

Source: Jonathan Martin in 2014 NY Times: 2016 presidential hopefuls , Dec 25, 2014

Voter ID laws offend African Americans

Democrats have blasted the effort in Republican states to enact strict voter identification laws, arguing they disproportionately affect minority voters. Paul acknowledged that much of the animosity surrounding the debate centers on race. Republicans claim the laws are essential to combat voter fraud. In past comments, Paul has acknowledged fraud exists but that "Republicans may have overemphasized this."

"There's 180,000 people in Kentucky who can't vote. And I don't know the racial breakdown, but it's probably more black than white," he said.

Source: The Hill weblog 2014 coverage of 2016 presidential hopefuls , May 9, 2014

Women won the "war on women": they're no longer downtrodden

PAUL: Well, you know, I think we have a lot of debates in Washington that get dumbed down and are used for political purposes. This whole sort of war on women thing, I'm scratching my head because if there was a war on women, I think they won. You know, the women in my family are incredibly successful. I have a niece at Cornell vet school, and 85% of the young people there are women. In law school, 60% are women; in med school, 55%. My younger sister's an ob-gyn with six kids and doing great. You know, I don't see so much that women are downtrodden; I see women rising up and doing great things. And, in fact, I worry about our young men sometimes because I think the women really are out-competing the men in our world. I think the facts show that women are doing very well, have come a long way. So I don't really see this, that there's some sort of war that's, you know, keeping women down.

Source: Meet the Press 2014 interviews of 2016 presidential hopefuls , Jan 26, 2014

Redefining marriage leads to economic and moral problems

For Paul, this seemed perfectly sensible. In fact, the senator went even further than Beck: "If we have no laws on this people take it to one extension further. Does it have to be humans? I'm kind of with you, I see the thousands-of-year tradition of the nucleus of the family unit. I also see that economically, if you just look without any kind of moral periscope and you say, what is it that is the leading cause of poverty in our country? It's having kids without marriage. The stability of the marriage unit is enormous and we should not just say oh we're punting on it, marriage can be anything."

Source: Rachel Maddow blog on U.S. Supreme Court rulings on DOMA , Jun 26, 2013

No national law on same-sex marriage; leave it to states

Source: John McCormick article, "Rand Paul Cuts Own Path" , May 10, 2013

Make federal benefits equal for gay couples

At the same time, Paul suggests that the tax code and health insurance should be made neutral so that gay couples benefit from the same breaks as married ones. Like Rubio, he has said that gay marriage should be left to the states to decide. He said Sunday that he is okay with the government being "neutral" on gay marriage; in February he said he was "not sure" how he felt about DOMA.

But he's already willing to let other states legalize gay marriage and to let gay couples have some federal benefits; he could expand that to mean marriage in all but name.

Source: Washington Post 2013 coverage of 2016 presidential hopefuls , Mar 26, 2013

Let states decide same-sex marriage; don't federalize it

PAUL: I think it's a really complicated issue. I've always said that the states have a right to decide. I do believe in traditional marriage, Kentucky has decided it, and I don't think the federal government should tell us otherwise. There are states that have decided in the opposite fashion, and I don't think the federal government should tell anybody or any state government how they should decide this. Marriage has been a state issue for hundreds of years. DOMA is complicated, though, because DOMA does provide protection for the states from the federal government. But, then part of it federalizes the issue. I think the way to fix DOMA is maybe to try to make all of our laws more neutral towards the issue, and I don't want the government promoting something I don't believe in.

Source: Fox News Sunday 2013 interviews: 2016 presidential hopefuls , Mar 24, 2013

Illegal to impose racial segregation in the private sector

Asked if he thought a private business had the right to say it would not serve black people, he said: "I don't want to be associated with those people, but I also don't want to limit their speech in any way in the sense that we tolerate boorish and uncivilised behaviour because that's one of the things freedom requires."

Since the furore, Paul has released a statement indicating that he would have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 de-segregation bill, a position he declined to take a day earlier.

"I support the Civil Rights Act because I overwhelmingly agree with the intent of the legislation, which was to stop discrimination in the public sphere and halt the abhorrent practice of segregation," he said.

Opposes same-sex marriage

Source: New York Times politics report: Kentucky , Nov 26, 2009

Voted NO on reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act.

Amends the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) to add or expand definitions of several terms used in such Act, including : "culturally specific services" to mean community-based services that offer culturally relevant and linguistically specific services and resources to culturally specific communities; "personally identifying information" with respect to a victim of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking; "underserved populations" as populations that face barriers in accessing and using victim services because of geographic location, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity; and "youth" to mean a person who is 11 to 24 years old.

Opponent's Argument for voting No (The Week; Huffington Post, and The Atlantic): House Republicans had objected to provisions in the Senate bill that extended VAWA's protections to lesbians, gays, immigrants, and Native Americans. For example, Rep. Bill Johnson (R-OH) voted against the VAWA bill because it was a "politically–motivated, constitutionally-dubious Senate version bent on dividing women into categories by race, transgender politics and sexual preference." The objections can be grouped in two broadly ideological areas--that the law is an unnecessary overreach by the federal government, and that it represents a "feminist" attack on family values. The act's grants have encouraged states to implement "mandatory-arrest" policies, under which police responding to domestic-violence calls are required to make an arrest. These policies were intended to combat the too-common situation in which a victim is intimidated into recanting an abuse accusation. Critics also say VAWA has been subject to waste, fraud, and abuse because of insufficient oversight.

Reference: Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act; Bill S. 47 ; vote number 13-SV019 on Feb 12, 2013

Opposes affirmative action.

The Christian Coalition voter guide [is] one of the most powerful tools Christians have ever had to impact our society during elections. This simple tool has helped educate tens of millions of citizens across this nation as to where candidates for public office stand on key faith and family issues.

The CC survey summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: "Affirmative action programs providing preferential treatment to minorities"

Source: Christian Coalition Survey 10-CC-q2 on Aug 11, 2010

Supports Amendment to prevent same sex marriage.

The Christian Coalition voter guide [is] one of the most powerful tools Christians have ever had to impact our society during elections. This simple tool has helped educate tens of millions of citizens across this nation as to where candidates for public office stand on key faith and family issues.

The CC survey summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: "Federal Marriage Amendment to prevent same sex marriage"

Source: Christian Coalition Survey 10-CC-q3 on Aug 11, 2010

Respect faith-based opposition to same-sex marriage.

Congressional Summary: The First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) prohibits the federal government from taking discriminatory action against a person on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction that:

marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.

Political Argument Opposed: [ACLU, July 20, 2015]: The House of Representatives & leading anti-LGBT organizations are pushing a bill--disingenuously titled the First Amendment Defense Act--that would open the door to unprecedented taxpayer-funded discrimination against LGBT people, single mothers, and unmarried couples. This bill would

allow federal contractors, including those that provide homeless shelters or drug treatment programs, to turn away LGBT people

permit a university to fire an unmarried teacher simply for becoming pregnant

permit federal employees to refuse to process tax returns, visa applications, or Social Security checks for all married same-sex couples

Source: H.R.2802 16-HR2802 on Jun 17, 2015

Search for...



X

Page last updated: Jul 16, 2020