Ben Carson Quotes

Society may no longer define marriage in the only way marriage has ever been defined in the annals of recorded history. Many societies allowed polygamy, many allowed child marriages, some allowed marriage within families; but none, in thousands of years, defined marriage as the union of people of the same sex.

In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality.

If one is going to change the definition of marriage to be, quote, 'same sex,' then there is absolutely no valid argument constitutionally or rhetorically you can make against multiple people getting married. These are radical social changes.

Traditional marriage between a man and a woman has been a cornerstone of our society for generations. If we are going to change that, it ought to be done by the will of the people.

There is something wrong with our culture when the view that marriage is between one man and one woman, a view shared by half the nation, is portrayed as evidence of hatred.

Since the dawn of time, traditional marriage - the union between one man and one woman - has been the building block of civilization, and at no point in our nation's history has that foundation been under more severe attack than now.

There are more than 30 states, who either by statute or constitutional amendment, have defined marriage as being between a man and a woman.

We can practice tolerance while still holding true to cultural values that protect the institution of marriage as a union between only a man and a woman.

Giving public sanction to homosexual marriage ends up redefining marriage, and it's certain to harm children.

Like the majority of Alaskans, I supported a constitutional amendment in 1998 defining marriage as only between a man and a woman, but my thinking has evolved as America has witnessed a clear cultural shift.

The United States Constitution does not one time even mention marriage. It neither requires Congress or the states to adopt same-sex marriage laws nor does it forbid them from maintaining traditional marriage laws.

My tact is that you don't change the definition of marriage for one group, homosexuals, because you have to change it for all the groups. So you don't do it, particularly if people in California vote on it, don't want it, they think that the heterosexuality is a societal stabilizer.

To show you, just to illustrate the inroads the homosexual marriage crowd has made, it is now common to hear on television and in the midst of debate the concept of "opposite-sex marriage."

There's never been a civilization that has rewritten what marriage and family means and survived.

We've arrived at a point where the President of the United States is going to lead a war on traditional marriage.

Same-sex marriage is so ingrained in the culture now that when you're talking about regular, good old-fashioned marriage, you have to say "opposite-sex marriage" to let people know what you're talking about. Just describing, just talking about "marriage" doesn't let anybody know what you mean anymore. You have to specify opposite-sex marriage.

Marriage will be defined in America. It’s just a question of whether it will be defined by the courts of defined by the people.

We are redefining the concept of marriage to say that fathers are optional.

Homosexual marriage is counterfeit marriage.

Culture, what you believe, what you value, how you live matters. Now, as fundamental as these principles are, they may become topics of democratic debates from time to time, so it is today with the enduring institution of marriage. Marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman.

Yeah, I think that social conservatives recognize that they didn't just lose the debate about same-sex marriage. They lost the debate about the institution of marriage, and those two things were sort of connected to each other. The way people thought about marriage changed.

I think it's important for people to understand that this started with President Bill Clinton. He, as president, thought it was such a big priority, he passed the defense of marriage - defense of traditional non-gay marriage - that we have it as a federal law.

I believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman.

I support traditional marriage. I always have.

There was a very strong bipartisan coalition in Congress under President Bill Clinton that passed the Defense of Marriage Act. And you've had a majority of the states in this country that have strongly stated that marriage ought to be remain the union between one man and one woman.