Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Rick Santorum Criticize Gay Marriage Rulings

Potential GOP candidates for president in 2016 Senators Rand Paul of Kentucky and Marco Rubio of Florida and Rick Santorum have criticized two Supreme Court rulings on gay marriage.

The high court released the decisions on Wednesday. Together they mean that California will become the 13^th state, plus the District of Columbia, to allow gay nuptials, and that the federal government must recognize those unions.

“I am very disappointed with today's Supreme Court rulings regarding marriage,” Santorum said in a statement. “The DOMA decision is another case of the high court overstepping its role, just as it did with Roe v. Wade.”

“Further, the Proposition 8 ruling refuses to affirm the process envisioned by our founders for the American people to express its will. These great moral issues of our time should be left to the democratic process, not to five activist judges.”

Rubio said in a statement that he appreciates “that many Americans' attitude towards same-sex marriage have changed in recent years” but added that such “disagreements” should be “settled through the democratic process, as the Founders intended, not through litigation and court pronouncements.”

“It is also my hope that those who argue for the redefinition of marriage to include same-sex marriage will refrain from assailing the millions of Americans who disagree with them as bigots,” he added.

Appearing on Glenn Beck's radio show, Paul found a “good side” to the court's ruling which struck down Proposition 8, California's gay marriage ban, due to petitioners' lack of standing.

“They're trying to say nothing,” Paul said. “The good side to this ruling is they have affirmed to states that this is a state issue and states can decide.”

He also suggested that allowing gay couples to marry could lead to polygamy or bestiality.

On limiting marriage to two people, Paul said “it is difficult because if we have no laws on this, people take it one extension further. 'Does it have to be human?' The question is, can some social mores be part of legislation? … The stability of the marriage unit is enormous and we shouldn't just say, 'Oh, we're punting on it and marriage can be anything.'”