Well that was quick:
"I probably needed to add a few words after that 'it's fine with me' and that it's fine with me that a state is using their sovereign rights to decide an issue," he said. "Obviously gay marriage is not fine with me. My stance hasn't changed."
Perry said he supported changing the Constitution in order to ban gay marriage, a position that he characterized as supportive of states' rights even as it would overrule New York's own decision on the matter.
So Perry is okay with states deciding marriage issues on their own, up until the Constitution can be amended in order to prevent consenting adults in love with each other from forming marriage pacts recognized by the state. This is consistent from a federalist point of view but morally reprehensible in the sense that Perry supports amending the Constitution in order to reflect his personal prejudices about who is entitled to what fundamental rights. But I suppose you couldn't expect much from the kind of person who says things like "Would you rather live in a state like this or in a state where a man can marry a man?"
You may also like:
You need to be logged in to comment.
(If there's one thing we know about comment trolls, it's that they're lazy)