O'Reilly blasts same-sex marriage critics
March 27th, 2013
11:26 AM ET
1 year ago

O'Reilly blasts same-sex marriage critics

(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."

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.


Filed under: Fox News • Same-sex marriage
soundoff (451 Responses)
  1. ghostriter

    Freedom, Why is it that conservatives can use the slippery slope concept for things like gay marriage turning into polygamy, but don't mind it so much when the AZ immigration law could just as easily slide down a slope into stop and search practices for anyone "fitting the description"?

    March 27, 2013 12:57 pm at 12:57 pm |
  2. Bad Republican

    If there is no gender requirement, why bother with a numeric requirement? What's wrong with bigamy?

    March 27, 2013 12:57 pm at 12:57 pm |
  3. GrowUp

    Scripture is someone's fantasy written down and marketed. Get over yourselves and join reality.

    March 27, 2013 12:58 pm at 12:58 pm |
  4. Hugh Jass

    He's a RINO. Kick him out of The Party.

    March 27, 2013 12:58 pm at 12:58 pm |
  5. Ex-TeaPartyr

    More wingnuts are going to boycott Faux News now!!!!!

    Wingnuts like their news to be one sided and untrue!!!!

    March 27, 2013 12:59 pm at 12:59 pm |
  6. bigbendjc

    This from the "Tide goes in, Tides go out" guy! WOW. Is he planning to run for office in the future? If so, he'll change his opinion.

    March 27, 2013 12:59 pm at 12:59 pm |
  7. ModernMan

    It's just a fad.

    March 27, 2013 12:59 pm at 12:59 pm |
  8. roger

    Gee do we ever see the #1 anchor of CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, or CBS stand up for something that the liberal left is against. If it has happened please enlighten me.

    March 27, 2013 01:00 pm at 1:00 pm |
  9. Howard

    Wow! A non-partisan monologue from Bill. Quick, grab hold of something, the laws of relativity might have just changed.

    March 27, 2013 01:01 pm at 1:01 pm |
  10. Todaysmoralssuck

    Yeah lets make it legal to rob banks and deaficate on government buildings too. No wonder our society is so confused and misguided. No leadership. They are all bought out.

    March 27, 2013 01:02 pm at 1:02 pm |
  11. Picaman

    Is a bible thumper the same as a Koran thumper?

    March 27, 2013 01:03 pm at 1:03 pm |
  12. GrowUp

    @Roger. No because the radical right is always wrong. Ever has it been. Just read a history book.

    March 27, 2013 01:03 pm at 1:03 pm |
  13. blindbear

    O'Reilly must have fallen and hit his head or something. Maybe ignorance IS curable.

    March 27, 2013 01:05 pm at 1:05 pm |
  14. nopenope

    @joe-

    Actually marriage is NOT a religious inst.itution...its a legal inst.itution. Why is religion involved in marriage is the real question

    March 27, 2013 01:05 pm at 1:05 pm |
  15. Equal Tratment Under the LAW

    If gays wanted to be treated equally, marriage would not need to be redefined. Redefining marriage is giving special treatment to a certain class, which is an attack on equal rights.

    March 27, 2013 01:05 pm at 1:05 pm |
  16. sbuler

    "If there is no gender requirement why bother with a numeric requirement." I love these kind of arguments! Right and we should let people marry their rubber ducky or their pet. Maybe because there is a difference between a gender requirement and a numeric or rubber ducky requirment!?! Try thinking. If you can handle the effort it takes.

    March 27, 2013 01:06 pm at 1:06 pm |
  17. Bob

    Reading his body of comments regarding the topic does not sound like "blasting" the critics. Of course, CNN has an agenda and I understand that.

    March 27, 2013 01:08 pm at 1:08 pm |
  18. kansashousewife

    Please tell me how allowing gay marriage will hurt my children. I have an aunt who has been with her partner for many years. To my kids, it just is....If my aunt and her partner were allowed to get married tomorrow, it would not throw my childrens universe into a tailspin. It certainly wouldn't affect any of you.

    March 27, 2013 01:08 pm at 1:08 pm |
  19. nopenope

    Bad Republican –

    Thats a pretty silly statement...the requirement was set for two consenting individuals LOOONG before gay marriage was even a thought

    March 27, 2013 01:08 pm at 1:08 pm |
  20. svann

    "If there is no gender requirement, why bother with a numeric requirement? What's wrong with bigamy?"

    I know that was asked with sarcasm so what IS wrong with it? Im fairly sure you ask it with the expectation that everyone agrees with you, but if you cant give a coherent reasoning about why it is wrong then try thinking about it instead of just going with your feelings. Secularly I see nothing wrong with it. And religiously I also see nothing wrong with it. Paul said religious leaders shouldnt because they should be blameless. Thats not the same as saying its wrong imo and its certainly not the same as saying that its a rule for everyone.

    March 27, 2013 01:08 pm at 1:08 pm |
  21. GrowUp

    If you a allow a man to marry a woman, where does it stop? A man marrying his sister, his grandmother, his dog? This is a slippery slope. Better not allow a man to marry a woman.

    March 27, 2013 01:08 pm at 1:08 pm |
  22. gladiatorgrl

    "Our Judeo-Christian traditions, which have made the United States the most prosperous and just society the world has ever known"

    no that would be the unions and no state sponsored religion

    March 27, 2013 01:09 pm at 1:09 pm |
  23. lathebiosas

    Good, Bill, good. Now keep coming, keep coming. We have a spot for you on our side just keep progressing.....

    March 27, 2013 01:09 pm at 1:09 pm |
  24. IvotedforObama

    What destroys these Bible Thumper's arguments is their hypocrisy. They go after gays, yet ignore adulterers like Limbaugh and Gingrich who have married multiple times. The Bible clearluy states if a man leaves his wife, except in the case of adultery, then he is an adulterer, yet the Bible Thumpers never go after these "immoral people."

    March 27, 2013 01:09 pm at 1:09 pm |
  25. gladiatorgrl

    I think his friendship with Jon Stewart has had a positive affect on O'Reilly.

    March 27, 2013 01:09 pm at 1:09 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19