Mitt Romney doesn’t recognize a losing battle. He was “shellshocked” that he lost the 2012 presidential election, despite every indication that he would come up short with voters. Now he’s convinced that the marriage equality battle is far from over, despite 18 court rulings to the contrary in less than nine months.
Romney expressed his opinion Sunday on “Meet the Press,” as part of the show’s never-ending quest to find irrelevant guests. Displaying the rhetorical power that propelled him to a second-place finish in 2012, Romney defended the ongoing, futile opposition to marriage equality.
“I don’t know that you have to worry about who wins or who loses a particular fight,” he said. “I think you stand for various principles, you communicate those to the American people, and they either support those or not. Sometimes if something is lost, while you move on to the next issue, you wish you had won that one but you move on. In this case, it continues to be an issue that people find relevant and important, something that is being considered in various states around the country.”
And why keep up the fight? It’s all about the kids, of course. ”I think the ideal setting for raising a child is in a setting where there’s a father and mother. Now there are many other different settings that children are raised in, and people have the right to live their life as they want to. But I think marriage should be defined in the way it’s been defined for several thousand years. And if gay couples want to live together, that’s fine as well, that’s their right.”
But not a civil right.
Romney also refused to say that kids raised by gay parents are just as adjusted as kids raised in heterosexual households, despite a mountain of scientific evidence to the contrary.
“It’s going to take a long, long time to determine whether having gay marriage will make it less likely for kids to be raised in settings where there’s a mom and a dad,” he said. “That’s not going to happen overnight. It’s something which happens over generations, in fact.”
It’s not hard to imagine what the federal government’s response to last year’s Supreme Court ruling would have been if Romney was president. Just one more reminder the elections have real consequences.