March 28th, 2013
06:10 PM ET
1 year ago

Rush Limbaugh concedes conservatives 'lost' marriage debate

(CNN) - Conservatives who oppose same-sex marriage must accept that they’ve “lost the issue,” radio host Rush Limbaugh argued Thursday.

“This issue is lost,” the conservative firebrand said. “I don't care what the Supreme Court does, this is now inevitable - and it's inevitable because we lost the language on this. “

Limbaugh went on to assert conservatives “lost the issue when we started allowing the word ‘marriage’ to be bastardized and redefined by simply adding words to it.”

“Marriage is one thing, and it was not established on the basis of discrimination,” he continued. “It wasn't established on the basis of denying people anything. ‘Marriage’ is not a tradition that a bunch of people concocted to be mean to other people with. But we allowed the left to have people believe that it was structured that way. “

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the legality of same-sex marriage earlier this week.

Another notable conservative, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly, said on Tuesday that 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."


Filed under: Rush Limbaugh • Same-sex marriage
soundoff (400 Responses)
  1. Tiredofitalready

    I don't care if two people of the same gender who love each other want to have a civil union with all of the same benefits of marriage. I think they should be able to do whatever it is that they need to do when they commit their lives to each other. But when you start redefining things, you're headed down a slippery slope. By the time my children reach my age it will be legal for two men and a woman to marry, two women and a man, brothers and sisters, family members to marry, more socially acceptable for all sorts of things that we presently feel are inappropriate. Does not wanting to go down this road make me a bad person? No, its simply because I don't want to unravel society bit by bit to fit a minority or even a majority. It may seem unrealistic to you now, but I bet 50 years ago it was unrealistic to them then that two people of the same gender would be openly gay, let alone fighting for the ability to marry legally.

    March 29, 2013 01:30 pm at 1:30 pm |
  2. ellid

    I'm stunned that Rush Limbaugh, who's been married multiple times, actually has the nerve to use the word "marriage" in conversation.

    March 29, 2013 01:33 pm at 1:33 pm |
  3. TD

    What is most interesting is that Rush had a MARRIED GAY man (Elton John) perform at his 4th wedding...And a reminder to everyone, Rush is in the Entertainment industry. He says stuff to get people excited. It is just his act.

    March 29, 2013 01:40 pm at 1:40 pm |
  4. Judy Wood

    And Rush is the savior of traditional marriage with four notches on his belt. Newt is no better. According to the Bible, the FLDS in Utah and Colorado have traditional marriages. How many wives did Jacob have? How about Salomon? How many concubines? You can't cherry pick for the answer.

    March 29, 2013 01:40 pm at 1:40 pm |
  5. Person of Interest

    Actually "traditional" marriage was concocted to be mean to people. Normally, to the women who were forced into the marriage. You can talk about traditional marriage all day but marriages for the longest time in history wasn't a man and a woman who feel in love. It was a monetary/political exchange between two families in the hopes that it would make them stronger. Nothing romanitic about it.

    March 29, 2013 01:44 pm at 1:44 pm |
  6. Jerry

    If the religious right had taken the approach of saying marriage is a religious term and should not be recognized by anything governmental directly they could have kept the marriage term like they wanted just between a man and a woman. However that would have been conceding that civil unions between gays was okay.. When this started they couldn't accept that

    Once they had committed down the road of gay marriage is wrong they could change course without looking like even bigger idiots/bigots.

    In the end gay marriage will be legal everywhere.. The world will continue on as it always has.

    March 29, 2013 01:46 pm at 1:46 pm |
  7. Lynda/Minnesota

    "I'm stunned that Rush Limbaugh, who's been married multiple times, actually has the nerve to use the word "marriage" in conversation."

    Rush is fully aware that his "form" of traditional marriage isn't based on New Testament theology either. Hence the capitulation.

    March 29, 2013 01:47 pm at 1:47 pm |
  8. rockysfan

    No, Rush, that's not the way it was. The RIGHT thought that they could "define" marriage and in that definition, they were discriminatory. Call it anything you want but that's what happened. Cry in your drugs somewhere else.

    March 29, 2013 01:48 pm at 1:48 pm |
  9. Core republican Values

    Long live "Rush The Hut" who reminds independents and decent human beings everywhere, all across the world, on a daily basis, that republicans are ignorant, self-serving, bigoted haters.

    March 29, 2013 01:49 pm at 1:49 pm |
  10. Mercury

    Limbaugh, of course, is secretly dreaming that all this will pave the way for him to marry himself.

    March 29, 2013 01:49 pm at 1:49 pm |
  11. Byron Kelly

    Tiredofitalready, you are so right. This is a slippery slope. We've already seen repeal of the miscegenation laws that were good enough for our ancestors, such that today people of different races can actually marry one another!! Where will it all end?!?

    March 29, 2013 01:55 pm at 1:55 pm |
  12. Rich

    So, Rush is saying conservatives lost, not because opposing equal rights is wrong, but because they opposed it with the wrong words? Wow.

    March 29, 2013 01:57 pm at 1:57 pm |
  13. Shemp

    " this is now inevitable – and it's inevitable because we lost the language on this. “ --Rush Limbaugh

    It's inevitable because it's right.

    March 29, 2013 01:57 pm at 1:57 pm |
  14. drinker75

    I don't understand the hang up of the word marriage, especially when it comes to the law. This isn't about religion, it's about being treated equally under the law. Marriage is a legal contract and should be seen as nothing more to the government. Marriage also existed before the bible.

    March 29, 2013 01:58 pm at 1:58 pm |
  15. B

    thats not all you lost Rushie Baby...you also lost an Election,a Generation, a direction, and just about every argument that has come out of your face.....the reason the "conservatives" are losing is YOU...!!! and Cry Baby Billy Oreally...and Pannicky Hannity...and miss congeniality Ann Horse Face Coulter......and the GOP will continue to be a bunch of losers as long as you and these other Murdoch Trunk Monkees are the face of the Party...keep it up Rush...take another pill and keep on preachin brother man...The Dems are loving you..

    March 29, 2013 02:00 pm at 2:00 pm |
  16. Bob Kelly

    I think that "traditional" marriage was a way to transfer "ownership" of a woman from her father to her husband. As outrageous of a notion as that is to consider, remember that women could not vote or own property. She was beholden to her family first and then to her husband. A pretty reprehensible thought, if you ask me.

    Marriage has evolved; from parents selecting their daughter's husband and providing a dowry to marry off their daughter to allowing adult children to marry the person they loved.

    Allowing two men or two women to take "advantage" of the benefits that my wife and I enjoy, and take for granted, does not marginalize my marriage and does not minimize the importance I place on my marriage.

    March 29, 2013 02:01 pm at 2:01 pm |
  17. hopeirv7

    I don't understand the hang up of the word marriage, especially when it comes to the law. This isn't about religion, it's about being treated equally under the law. Marriage is a legal contract and should be seen as nothing more to the government. Marriage also existed before the bible.

    March 29, 2013 02:04 pm at 2:04 pm |
  18. Skarphace

    Fair is Fair

    "Creationism is not science. Evolution is."

    -––

    Both require faith.

    _____

    Creationism requires the faith in an invisible man in the sky. Evolution requires faith in the scientific method. The former requires blind faith as it does not change. The latter requires evidence as it does.

    March 29, 2013 02:10 pm at 2:10 pm |
  19. Taylor

    It is impossible to speak about the World without speaking about God, after all God made the World. The Bible said "Be not deceived God is not mocked, whatever a Man Sowth he shall Reap” The reality is Man has freewill and if he sows immorality he will reap it.

    On one hand, man looks at one who uses performance drugs as wrong or unnatural but having children and raising them by male couples or female couples as good and natural.

    Praise those who Speak, Hear and Do the word of God.

    CT

    March 29, 2013 02:12 pm at 2:12 pm |
  20. Skarphace

    Tiredofitalready: "when you start redefining things, you're headed down a slippery slope."

    You just don't get it do you? Let me spell it out to you: the legal definition of "marriage" was changed in 1996 with th passage of DOMA. You don't want "marriage" to be redefined? Fine. Strike down DOMA. Problem solved.

    March 29, 2013 02:13 pm at 2:13 pm |
  21. TexasCentrist

    Like other idiotic Republicans, Limbaugh thinks their problems are due to peripheral issues like language rather than their core beliefs being out of step with public opinion. To think that anyone could even control the usage of language is preposterous. And if they even were able to control common usage of the term "marriage", it would not change the facts. What a jerk.

    March 29, 2013 02:16 pm at 2:16 pm |
  22. joe

    Who cares what Limbaugh thinks?

    He's a street hustler. He's not a qualifed expert on any subject. He just hustles people on free radio and then sells them mattresses or internet security or gold or whatever in the frequent commercials.

    His whole operation is just a big scam on the uneducated and ignorant listeners. Kind of like people who go to church and get worked over by their Pastor.

    March 29, 2013 02:17 pm at 2:17 pm |
  23. Steffan

    Guys. Drop the Bible stuff. It doesn't matter. Gay marriage is just fine. It's normal. It's correct. Just go with it.

    March 29, 2013 02:18 pm at 2:18 pm |
  24. matthew kelly

    This issue has been going around for about 2 weeks now. Being a Christian, I'm disappointed a bit but it's expected for society to turn away from God. Every human nation since the world began will always forsake God. Heck, we all as humans have forsaken God. You can either personally choose to follow Him or not. You can choose to follow Him or not. It's our "choice." It's the same choice that He gave us from the beginning. It's our job as Christians to only put God's word out. That's it.

    March 29, 2013 02:22 pm at 2:22 pm |
  25. David

    Conservatives lost the "traditional marriage" debate when they got on the No-Fault Divorce bandwagon along with everyone else in the 70's & 80's. Since then anything that anyone says about "traditional marriage" is pure hypocrisy.

    March 29, 2013 02:22 pm at 2:22 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16