(CNN) - Bill O'Reilly, the conservative Fox News host, believes same-sex marriage advocates have a more convincing argument than opponents, who do nothing but rehash scripture to make their point.
"The compelling argument is on the side of homosexuals," O'Reilly said Tuesday on Fox. "That's where the compelling argument is. 'We're Americans. We just want to be treated like everybody else.' That's a compelling argument, and to deny that, you have got to have a very strong argument on the other side. The argument on the other side hasn't been able to do anything but thump the Bible."
Follow @politicalticker Follow @KilloughCNN
O'Reilly has previously stated he takes a libertarian view on the issue, and repeated Tuesday night that it's a decision that should be left up to the states. "I support civil unions. I always have. The gay marriage thing, I don't feel that strongly about it one way or another."
Both sides of the debate clashed this week in Washington as the Supreme Court hears challenges to two cases dealing with the issue.
O'Reilly has been less critical of so-called Bible thumpers in the past. In a May 2009 column on his website, he again argued the matter should be decided by states but also said he understands that "most Americans believe heterosexual marriage deserves a special place in our society."
"Our Judeo-Christian traditions, which have made the United States the most prosperous and just society the world has ever known, speak to a family built around a responsible mother and a father-certainly the optimum when it comes to raising children," he wrote.
But, he argued, people who feel strongly about traditional marriage "have allowed themselves to be intimidated" and have refused to stand up for what they believe in.
"When was the last time you saw a Catholic cardinal or archbishop speak against gay marriage on television? I know–I've invited some of them. They all turned me down," he wrote.
His comments Tuesday weren't the first time he's taken on his own party. Last week, O'Reilly sharply criticized Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann for making "trivial attacks" and unsubstantiated claims of President Barack Obama's so-called perks in the White House.
Naah, what really made this nation prosperous is the wealthy taking advantage of the enslavement, and when that was ruled illegal, employment at ridiculously low standards, of low wage immigrant labor who usually were of a different race than the wealthy business owners. The disparity of income in this country is appaling. Racial discrimination has always been about the wealthy setting themselves above and apart from people of color,and thus setting up a wage caste system.
Last time I checked, saying one group has a better argument than another is not that same as blasting the group with a weaker argument. But what did I expect from cnn?
@Bilbo, You asked, "why is government in the marriage business anyway?" The government is involved because there are many laws in a wide range of topics that focus on married couples. These topics include taxes, inheritance, marital privilege when testifying in court, insurance issues, and many other things. It is not just a symbolic or religious ceremony.... there are many important laws and benefits involved.
Anything that happens on Fox News is of no interest to me.
I listen to that segment and read your review. You claim O'Reilly is a republican and he says he is not. I believe he has been tough on whoever misleads the people in this country whether is Obama, Bachman, Frank, or Romney. The writer wants to put him into a category that fits the narrative of republicans eating their young. My comment is, "look what is happening to our country under Obama and the Democrats". SAD
Civil Unions to protect gay peoples rights, but no marrige.
I didn't think I would ever be agreeing with O'Reilly. It's very hard for this old southern guy to support gays. On this it is really not something the government should be trying to legislate so if they want to marry let them. It don't affect me and its probably good for everyone. People use the Bible to twist things and in lots of cases do more harm than good.
O'Reily just ensured that I will NOT be listening to anything that fox News has to say in the future!
@ br I know many heterosexual couples that don't want kids but still get all the benefits of marriage. What's your point again?
LOL, since when does CNN care about what fox news is saying?
I'm hardly a fan of Bill O'Reilly, but to be fair to him this is not the first time that he has injected some rational thought and good sense into the anti-gay agenda. The first time I saw this in him was when I was stuck in a waiting room or someplace where I couldn't avoid Fox News on the television and he was interviewing the spokesperson for the Million Mom group who at that time was trying to have Ellen fired from her job at JC Penneys because she was gay. O'Reilly was fairly hard on the woman, going so far as to suggest the Million Moms group was acting very "un-American" She kept protesting, but he kept pushing the point.
how can the same sex create a family without striping someone else of theirs. same sex anything is just flat wrong naturally has nothing to do with rights.
@br woman can procreate with a sperm donor. Ever heard of that?
@ Virginia: now you're speaking my language...
Two men or Two women can have childern. It's call addoption.
O'Reilly's ethics are always situational. He tries to straddle the fence on almost every issue. His maid concern is clearly his bottom-line, hence, his ratings. He is not a conservative. He is not a liberal. He is simply an opportunist who is willing to say anything that benefits him personally. He is an empty suit.
"The gay marriage thing, I don't feel that strongly about it one way or another." Spoken like a true Libertarian. I don't want taxes, but I want you to fix the roads and put out the fires. I don't care about anybody else's civil rights, but don't tell me what I can or cannot do. So Ayn Rand.
O'Reilly is correct on this issue because this country was founded on the rights of the people to do what the want withinthe limits of the law. Freedom, liberty, and fulfillment of happiness, is a right of every tax paying American.
Marriage has never been strictly a 'Christian' thing, and even if it was narrowed to encompass only that religion, marriage has gone through plenty of iterations through the years, just has the 'traditional' roles of 'man and woman' have.
Marriage is a civil convenience that can have religious undertones. Marriage can be performed either by religious or justice (legal) means. At the heart of the matter is simply that, as Bill mentioned, they are Americans and just want to be treated like everybody else.
If people object on religious grounds, and believe that gay marriage is a sin, then they should take comfort in the fact(?) that God will deal with them in the afterlife. Until then, this is a union desired by two consenting adults that only directly affects them. Have done with this ridiculous issue, give folks the option to 'opt out' of performing gay ceremonies if it makes them uncomfortable, and move on.
I'm over this whole argument – it's silly – grant them their piece of paper, and the headaches that accompany it – financial and otherwise. Why they want more government interference in their lives is beyond me! The government doesn't do anything for free. There's bound to be a "gay marriage tax" waiting in the wings, somewhere. We have to tax you for that marriage, because if you were a hetrosexual couple, you'd be paying XXXXX tax. It's only fair – right? They're going to ask for the child deductions, if they adopt...they can't produce a child...why should they get the decuctions like those that do?
Why don't they hit them where it hurts? Demand that the courts separate church and state and deny tax benefits to any married couple. A religious ceremony should not give government benefits to anybody under the US constitution. Watch the bible thumpers scramble over that one.
First time ever that I have agreed with anything O'Reilly has said. Probably the last, too.
@OKC. why not?
Bill is looking at the next 10 years and seeing the writing on the wall has to change to avoid becoming the next Glen Beck. The hate has run it's course, Fox News is a laughing stock and he is repositioning himself to be more moderate.
People who comment about O'Reilly and have no clue about him are hilarious. I have watched O'Reilly for ten years and he has always been for Civil Unions- ALWAYS...So please stop trying to say he's pandering, moving to the left for voets, bla bla, bla......The reason he has been number 1 in all of cable news for 12 years straight is bc he is NOT a member of ANY party and he attacks both Republicans and Democrats and is just a fair individual. Please watch before you judge!
I don't always see eye-to-eye with Bill and his republican support but I applaud him for his comment. Hopefully more Republicans and Democrats will leave their party line politics and adopt a more libertarian view.