Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Just Asking Questions
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Policy

Mary Cheney Criticizes Her Sister's Position on Gay Marriage

Liz is running for Senate in Wyoming and supports a "traditional definition of marriage," Mary is in a same-sex marriage

Reason Staff | 11.18.2013 8:30 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Wyoming Senate candidate Liz Cheney's (R) opposition to gay marriage is drawing criticism from her lesbian sister.

Cheney, running against Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), reiterated on Sunday morning that she doesn't support gay marriage. That drew rebukes from Mary Cheney and her wife, Heather Poe.

Poe took to Facebook to rip Liz Cheney for her comments.

"I was watching my sister-in-law on Fox News Sunday (yes Liz, in fifteen states and the District of Columbia you are my sister-in-law) and was very disappointed to hear her say "I do believe in the traditional definition of marriage," she says in a Sunday afternoon post.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Google Introduces Software To Block Child Porn Searches

Reason Staff
PolicyCultureGay Marriage
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (4)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Charles.H.Anziulewicz@wv.   12 years ago

    Someone needs to tell Liz Cheney that absolutely NOTHING is happening to "traditional marriage" as it applies to people who are Straight (i.e. heterosexual). The human population will always be predominantly heterosexual, and Straight couples will continue to date, get engaged, marry, and build lives and families together as they always have. None of that is going to change when Gay couples decide to tie the knot also.

    Liz Cheney says marriage equality should be handled by the states, not the federal government. Problem is, MOST of the legal benefits and protections of marriage come from the federal government. During its recent DOMA decision, the Supreme Court could have issued a comprehensive ruling requiring Gay and Straight couples to be treated equally, at ALL levels of government, but instead they chose to punt on the some of the details.

    So what now? Most of the legal benefits of marriage come from the federal government. Take survivor benefits under Social Security, for example. Legally married Gay couples in Iowa are now entitled to those benefits, but suppose one of those couples relocates to West Virginia, which has a statutory ban on same-sex marriage. Does the state have the power to forcibly annul that marriage? And if so, does the couple now LOSE those federal benefits?

    1. PM   12 years ago

      Liz Cheney says marriage equality should be handled by the states, not the federal government. Problem is, MOST of the legal benefits and protections of marriage come from the federal government.

      Amazing how easily the federal government can move in on functions historically left to the state merely by involving itself where it has no authority and passing out prizes. I sure hope that never happens with police departments, highways, minimum drinking age...

  2. Charles.H.Anziulewicz@wv.   12 years ago

    As for "traditional marriage," who DOESN'T support it? If any of my single Straight friends finds a compatible person of the opposite sex to get "traditionally married" to, no one will be happier than me. The fact that I support marriage equality for Gay couples does not mean I'm somehow opposed to "traditional marriage." I look at this from a purely Constitutional standpoint. And unless the Constitution only applies to people who are Straight, there is no justification for denying law-abiding, taxpaying Gay couples the same legal benefits and opportunities that Straight couples have always taken for granted.

    1. PM   12 years ago

      As for "traditional marriage," who DOESN'T support it?

      No True Scotsman good libertarian should. It's one of the most egregious examples of the government's pernicious involvement in areas of life where it has no legitimate authority (and no constitutional purview either, in the case of the fedgov). Shit, even Gillespie SLD's his gay marriage rah rah sessions.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Seattle's Delivery Minimum Wage Failed Drivers and Raised Costs

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 12.20.2025 7:00 AM

Jake Tapper on Terrorism, Executive Power, and Venezuelan Boat Bombings

Nick Gillespie | From the January 2026 issue

Was There a Woke War on White Millennial Men?

Robby Soave | 12.19.2025 4:10 PM

Jimmy Lai Is a Martyr for Freedom

Billy Binion | 12.19.2025 3:54 PM

Trump's Designation of Fentanyl As a 'Weapon of Mass Destruction' Is a Drug-Fueled Delusion

Jacob Sullum | 12.19.2025 3:30 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

I WANT FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS!

Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.

Make a donation today! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks