Marco Rubio: I ‘Disagree’ With Same-Sex Marriage Ruling, But It’s ‘Law’

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) pointed out Friday that while he and others who disagree with the Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage ruling must abide by that decision for the time being, the next President would have the power to bring in justices who would protect Americans that support “traditional” marriage going forward.

“While I disagree with this decision, we live in a republic and must abide by the law,” the Republican presidential candidate said in a statement. “As we look ahead, it must be a priority of the next president to nominate judges and justices committed to applying the Constitution as written and originally understood.”

Rubio said he disagreed with the court’s majority opinion that same-sex marriage was a matter of a human being’s dignity rather than a question of the definition of marriage. He reiterated that he believes marriage is defined as a union between one man and one woman.

The senator concluded that he hoped both sides of the same-sex marriage debate would “respect the dignity of the other” going forward.

Read Rubio’s full statement below:

“I believe that marriage, as the key to strong family life, is the most important institution in our society and should be between one man and one woman. People who disagree with the traditional definition of marriage have the right to change their state laws. That is the right of our people, not the right of the unelected judges or justices of the Supreme Court. This decision short-circuits the political process that has been underway on the state level for years.

“While I disagree with this decision, we live in a republic and must abide by the law. As we look ahead, it must be a priority of the next president to nominate judges and justices committed to applying the Constitution as written and originally understood.

“The next president and all in public office must strive to protect the First Amendment rights of religious institutions and millions of Americans whose faiths hold a traditional view of marriage. This is a constitutional duty, not a political opinion. Our nation was founded on the human right of religious freedom, and our elected leaders have a duty to protect that right by ensuring that no one is compelled by law to violate their conscience.

“I firmly believe the question of same sex marriage is a question of the definition of an institution, not the dignity of a human being. Every American has the right to pursue happiness as they see fit. Not every American has to agree on every issue, but all of us do have to share our country. A large number of Americans will continue to believe in traditional marriage, and a large number of Americans will be pleased with the Court’s decision today. In the years ahead, it is my hope that each side will respect the dignity of the other.”