[Do you agree with Terry Moffit that homosexuality can be changed? It can be cured?]
''My respect with when answering this question before, is that it really is a state issue as to how those issues want to resolved. It should be handled at a state level.... I've not seen his website so I'm not able to comment.''
[Do you agree that homosexuality is a choice?]
''I think that's up to the individual. The individual has to make that decision.''
[About whether or not they're gay or about whether or not they believe that?]
''You know, I'm not going to intrude upon an individual's decision as to what he or she does. The fact of the matter is, it's a state issue. That's our position in the campaign. That's my answer to the question.''
''We're an increasingly diverse country. You know, I want to be straight with you. And as a diverse country, I think that it's important that there are different approaches to different values. And I think that it's best that states be able to make those choices. Like, for example, the state of Alaska, this is a good example. We passed down a constitutional amendment saying that marriage only between a woman and a man in 1998. You know, there are other states that decided different. You know, you can probably, I think, suggest that that is something that accommodates the very diverse country that we have in this country.''
[Is there a Federal role in banning gay marriage?]
''Well, I think there's the Defense of Marriage Act, which I support.''
[Why should there be a Federal role there if it should be a state issue otherwise?]
''Well, my perspective is that it is, at the core, a state issue. But there are Federal issues obviously intertwined. You've got taxation policy that otherwise depends on certain standards. So, as a consequence of taxation from the Federal government, there clearly is a role. But I think ultimately, as the country becomes more diverse, that those decisions have got to be made at the state level. It's something that can keep us together as a country, it can accommodate the various differences that we have in the country, and I think that it also allows people to be much more active at the state level in making policy changes. And, you know, just like our Founders intended -- laboratories in democracy. What better way to see how things work out than at that level?''
[But you do want a Federal role in restricting the state's ability to legalize gay marriage. But at the state level you --]
''That's not what I said. I said that there is a Federal role. There are obvious decisions that are made based on the standards.''
[Do you think there should be a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage?]
''That's up to the people. If you've got a three-quarters vote, ratify it. I'd vote for it.''
[You would vote for it?]
''I would, yeah. But it would require an Amendment to the Constitution. Yeah.''
Joe Miller, a candidate running for Alaska's seat in the US Senate. Here he walks while answering Rachel Maddow's questions. Miller's astounding answers seem to make it rather clear that he is against gay rights, believes that homosexuality can be regulated by the legal will of popular votes or state-level legislation, and that the US Constitution should be changed to prohibit gay and lesbian marriages. Miller is a Tea Party favorite and is reportedly the front runner against write-in Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, and also Democrat Scott McAdams. (Rachel Maddow / MSNBC)
Maddow and many other news sources have proven repeatedly this year that, despite Tea Party claims that their movement is not about social issues or being against gay rights, the vast majority of the candidates certainly hold terribly anti-gay values. Many Tea Party-backed political figures have stated their support of laws that oppress gays or regulate sexual behavior between consenting adults, yet, at the same time, they claim they want less government involvment in people's lives.