Bill O’Reilly: Gay Marriage Supporters Have a “Compelling Argument”

    March 27, 2013
    Sean Patterson
    Comments are off for this post.

For the second day in a row, the U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments in a case involving gay marriage.

While the issue has predictably come to the fore on social media, it has also become a big topic of conversation on cable news.

Last night, Fox News star Bill O’Reilly shocked many of his viewers by admitting he finds the case for gay marriage “more compelling” than the opposition’s case. In a conversation about the court cases with Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly on The O’Reilly Factor, he stated that U.S. policy shouldn’t be based on the Christian Bible.

Though O’Reilly prefaces his statement with “I hate to say this,” he goes on to say:

“The compelling argument is on the side of homosexuals. 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 gotta have a very strong argument on the other side, and the other side hasn’t been able to do anything but thump the Bible.”

O’Reilly made it clear that he has always supported civil unions, but that he doesn’t feel strongly one way or the other about gay marriage, seeing it as an issue for states to decide. “I want all Americans to be happy,” said O’Reilly.

O’Reilly also used the conversation to attack politicians for changing their views on the issue of gay marriage now that public opinion in the U.S. has shifted. He calls former President Bill Clinton a “phony” and called politicians who shift their views to match popular opinion “sleazy.”

O’Reilly may have a point that politicians who took a principled stand for gay rights before that stance became popular might be remembered more fondly by history. However, another way to look at it could be that the politicians changing their minds are simply representing the majority opinion of their constituents in a representative democracy. Considering his experience, O’Reilly seems inordinately surprised that politicians are playing politics.

  • Brigid Mcdonagh

    I believe gay people should have the same rights as everyone else. Maybe they should use another word instead of marriage maybe like the word United.

    • davidg2e

      Of course, they should have the same “rights.” However, “marriage” describes the union of a man and woman for a specific purpose…procreation. It is not compelling to say that many people marry who have no intention of producing children. From time immemorial, a man and a woman have been joined, in ceremony, to become one…a family…and produce progeny. That ceremony, for that purpose, has come to be defined as “marriage.” I know that the term is now used to describe a variety of unions, such as “the marriage of law and equity,” or butter “marrying” toast, or whatever, but that is the joining of ideas, or inanimate objects, and everyone understands and does not confuse that with the union of man and woman. Dogs and cats don’t marry, regardless of their keepers’ beliefs or predilections. If you want to call it something else, fine. It simply is NOT a marriage! A man cannot be a mommy and it matters not if there is in vitro fertilization or some other method of inseminating the female who is a stranger to the relationship in order to produce a child.

  • http://yahoo.com Danny M Lucas

    Why not base the decision on the Christian Bible, our Country was based upon the Bible, our Money is based upon the Bible and if the issue was voted on nationally, gay marriage would fail! Not too mention, the Supreme has no business deciding this issue!

  • betsy

    A nation’s laws must apply to all citizens equally. When a nation’s law does not apply equally, then that law must be changed.

  • http://ATT Joe

    Watch Bill sometimes – change from CNBC who is so far left it makes my head spin and Bill is so far right my head is going to spin around like the Exorcist Movie – didn’t Bill have to oay millions to settle a sexual harrasment charge – from a male staffer?