the conflict is with the understanding of teachings of the church. and for me it s a conflict of vision. of who we are as a church. if you had been an activist for planned parenthood and held the same position you could understand given the pro-life position of the church how they wouldn t want you in that role. is this the same kind of circumstance? i don t think so. because i think the marriage issue goes to who i am as a person and who god made me as. so i don t think it s the same. i was surprised, andrea with you have appealed to the pope. i always wondered, how do you address a let tore the pope? we wondered that too, and had to do research. any reply from the pontiff? not yet. he said things recently that would seem supportive of a union like this. oh absolutely. he has reached out to the gay and lesbian community.
it is. the conflict is with the understanding of the teachings of the church. and for me it s a conflict of vision of who we are as a church. if you had been an activist for planned parenthood and held the same position you could understand given the pro life position of the church how they wouldn t want you in that role is this the same kind of a circumstance? i don t think so because i think the marriage issue goes to or goes to who i am as a person and who i don t think it s the same. i was surprised andrea with you ve appealed to the pope i wonder by the way, how do you address a letter to the pope? here it is. we wondered that too, we had to do some research. any reply? no not yet. he s said some things that would seem supportive of a union like this? absolutely he s reached out to the gay and lesbian
you could argue everybody s point of view is represented in the supreme court. isn t that a good thing? everybody has seen gets a piece of what they wanted representative and how they to want see the constitution interpreted. that s true. i appreciated professor ogletree s explanation of how this evolved through the years. i loved pete williams explanation of scalia being a textualist and roberts being an institutionalist. those are important distinctions. but to follow up on one thing speaker gingrich said i lost my train of thought. no, no. that s all right. no, no, i m sorry. i did just kind of space there. i m still visualizing the white house bathed in rainbow colors and i m having a slight flashback. i can t wait for the red, black and green to come. no, but i think the marriage
a caring man. a religious man. but he just didn t get it. and finally he said you know, change comes so slow. but then it comes so fast. and i think there s a lot of people dealing with this this week. this change did come remarkably fast on the marriage issue. if you look back at the civil rights movement, the women s right movement took many, many years. took many setbacks. this one did happen if you remember 2004 george w. bush wins a relatively close presidential election in part because republicans selectively in battleground states put constitutional amendments on the ballot to drive up conservative turnout outlawing gay marriage. what now? will any of these republicans have the courage i guess to look past their base, which is angry, losing on obamacare? losing on marriage? seeing these other things happening, to where the country s going or are they beholden to that base, in the short term? and molly as i ask you the question the reactions, two different schools if you will i
and get 10 gigs of data for $80 a month and $15 per line. the win-win-win. hurry in, offer ends june 30th. and save without settling. only on verizon. however the decision comes down on the marriage issue, one thing is undeniable, there s been this incredible shift in attitudes across the country. you know, when i became president, same-sex marriage was legal in only two states.