First off, Wikipedia is not a credible source. It is controlled by a group of editors who are leftists, and in many cases factual corrections are undone by them simply because they disagree with the editors politics.
Secondly that page agrees with me:
"Paul opposes all federal efforts to define marriage, whether defined as a union between one man and one woman, or defined as including anything else as well. He believes that recognizing or legislating marriages should be left to the states, and not subjected to "judicial activism".[197] For this reason, Paul voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004."
"He says that in a best case scenario, governments would enforce contracts and grant divorces but otherwise have no say in marriage.[201] Paul has also stated he doesn't want to interfere in the free association of two individuals in a social, sexual, and religious sense.[202][203] Additionally, when asked if he was supportive of gay marriage Paul responded "I am supportive of all voluntary associations and people can call it whatever they want."[202]"
Thus, Ron Paul, directly quoted, endorses gay marriage. Something you can't say for Barack Obama.
"Same-sex marriage
In a 2007 interview with John Stossel, Paul stated that he supported the right of gay couples to marry, so long as they didn't "impose" their relationship on anyone else, on the grounds of supporting voluntary associations."
I cut all the parts which contradict these because they are due to misinterpretations or assertions based on legislation that don't include any statements by Paul, or an explanation for why Paul might support some act. Paul has to pick and choose legislation carefully because most legislation contains both constitutional and unconstitutional provisions.
You can't cite him supporting some bad legislation unless you give the reasons he supported it, especially when it conflicts with direct statements. Well, you can, but that's just spin.
Now, I've spent time debating a wikipage, when you didn't provide even an argument for your position.
Secondly that page agrees with me: "Paul opposes all federal efforts to define marriage, whether defined as a union between one man and one woman, or defined as including anything else as well. He believes that recognizing or legislating marriages should be left to the states, and not subjected to "judicial activism".[197] For this reason, Paul voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004."
"He says that in a best case scenario, governments would enforce contracts and grant divorces but otherwise have no say in marriage.[201] Paul has also stated he doesn't want to interfere in the free association of two individuals in a social, sexual, and religious sense.[202][203] Additionally, when asked if he was supportive of gay marriage Paul responded "I am supportive of all voluntary associations and people can call it whatever they want."[202]"
Thus, Ron Paul, directly quoted, endorses gay marriage. Something you can't say for Barack Obama.
"Same-sex marriage In a 2007 interview with John Stossel, Paul stated that he supported the right of gay couples to marry, so long as they didn't "impose" their relationship on anyone else, on the grounds of supporting voluntary associations."
I cut all the parts which contradict these because they are due to misinterpretations or assertions based on legislation that don't include any statements by Paul, or an explanation for why Paul might support some act. Paul has to pick and choose legislation carefully because most legislation contains both constitutional and unconstitutional provisions.
You can't cite him supporting some bad legislation unless you give the reasons he supported it, especially when it conflicts with direct statements. Well, you can, but that's just spin.
Now, I've spent time debating a wikipage, when you didn't provide even an argument for your position.