>>> PRIDE PARADE OVERLAPPED WITH
ABORTION RIGHTS PROTESTS THIS
WEEKEND, THE CELEBRATION TOOK ON
A SENSE OF URGENCY AFTER SUPREME COURT JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS
COURT JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS SIGNALED THAT THE COURT SHOULD
RECONSIDER.
>> I CAN ONLY HOPE THAT THINGS
WILL CHANGE AND WE CAN BE A MORE
ACCEPTING SOCIETY OF ALL PEOPLE,
NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, THE FEW THAT
ARE MAKING THESE DECISIONS FOR
US.
>> WHAT HAPPENED ON FRIDAY WAS A
REMINDER OF WHY WE DO WHAT WE
DO.
WE ALL GOT LIKE MUSCLE MEMORY,
PRIDE, TOOK IT FOR GRANTED.
NOW WE GET TO REMEMBER THAT THE
THING THAT WE ARE CELEBRATING
ARE AT RISK.
WHAT IF NEXT YEAR THE THING THAT
WE'RE CELEBRATING THIS YEAR
DON'T EXIST ANYMORE.
>> THOMAS MAY BE ALONE IN HIS
VIEW, BUT WHO MIGHT BE WILLING
TO JOIN HIM DOWN THE ROAD.
AS MY NEXT GUEST HAS SAID ONE
RIGHT IS TAKEN AWAY, EVERY OTHER
RIGHT WE'VE COME TO RELY ON IN
THIS COUNTRY IS AT RISK.
JOINING ME NOW IS JIM OBERGEFELL
OBERGEFELL, THE LEAD PLAINTIFF
IN THE SUPREME COURT CASE.
HE'S ALSO A CANDIDATE FOR OHIO
STATE REPRESENTATIVE.
JIM, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
BEING HERE.
WHAT ARE YOU PREPARING FOR?
>> I'M PREPARING FOR A VERY
HARD, LONG FIGHT.
YOU KNOW, THIS DECISION NUMBER
ONE IN TRUTH ON THETRUDES ON THE
PREGNANCY PERSON DESERVES TO
HAVE WHEN MAKING A DECISION THAT
IMPACTS THEIR HEALTH WITH THEIR
PHYSICIAN, WITH THEIR FAMILY
MEMBERS, THEIR LOVED ONES, AND
NOW WITH JUSTICE THOMAS'S
CONCURRING OPINION, A TARGET HAS
BEEN PAINTED ON THE BACK OF
MARRIAGE EQUALITY.
ON THE BACK OF OUR ABILITY TO
ENJOY INTIMATE RELATIONS WITH
ANOTHER PERSON IN OUR HOME, IN
THE PRIVACY OF OUR HOME AND NOT
HAVE THAT BE CRIMINALIZED.
NOT TO MENTION A WOMAN'S RIGHT
TO GET BIRTH CONTROL.
SO MUCH OF WHAT WE HAVE ENJOYED
IN THIS NATION, SO MUCH OF OUR
CIVIL RIGHTS PROGRESS IS AT RISK
BECAUSE OF THIS DECISION.
>> CLARENCE THOMAS'S OPINION
WASN'T A CONCURRING OPINION, IT
WAS NOT THE MAJORITY OPINION.
HE SAID THAT WE SHOULD GO BACK
AS A COUNTRY OR AS THE SUPREME
COURT AND LOOK AT ALL THOSE
CASES.
ARE YOU HOPEFUL THAT HE IS
ALONE.
DO YOU FEEL BETTER KNOWING THAT
THE MAJORITY WROTE THAT THIS
SPECIFICALLY DID NOT APPLY TO
YOUR CASE, IT DOES NOT APPLY TO
LAWRENCE.
IT DOES NOT APPLY TO OTHER CASES
THAT RELY ON THE SAME LEGAL
ARGUMENT.
>> I WISH I COULD SAY THAT GIVES
ME SOME COMFORT, BUT IT DOESN'T
BECAUSE ALL I HAVE TO DO IS
THINK ABOUT THESE JUSTICES
DURING THE CONFIRMATION
HEARINGS, FRONT OF THE SENATE.
MOST OF THEM SAID THEY
CONSIDERED A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO
ABORTION, THEY CONSIDERED ROE
VERSUS WADE PRECEDENT.
WELL, THEY CLEARLY HAVE PROVEN
THAT PRECEDENT DOES NOT MATTER
TO THEM.
THEY HAVE PROVEN THAT THEY'RE
WILLING TO TAKE AWAY RIGHTS THAT
PEOPLE IN THIS NATION HAVE
ENJOYED.
SO EVEN THOUGH THAT DECISION
INCLUDES THOSE WORDS, I TAKE NO COMFORT IN THEM BECAUSE I FIND
COMFORT IN THEM BECAUSE I FIND
IT HARD TO BELIEVE ANYTHING, THE
EXTREME MEMBERS OF THIS COURT
SAY.
>> ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT
ABORTION BEING STRUCK DOWN IN
CONGRESS, A FEDERAL BAN ON
ABORTION IN THE FUTURE IF
REPUBLICANS WHO HAVE BEEN
SUPPORTIVE LARGELY OF THE
OVERTURNING OF ROE V. WADE, IF
REPUBLICANS WERE TO TAKE CONTROL
OF THE MAJORITY IN THE HOUSE,
THE MAJORITY IN THE SENATE, AND
TO REGAIN THE PRESIDENCY?
>> I AM DEFINITELY CONCERNED
ABOUT THAT, AND THE HYPOCRITICAL
THING IS THAT THIS IS COMING
FROM A PARTY, FROM MEMBERS OF A
PARTY WHO SAY THEY ARE AGAINST
GOVERNMENT INTRUSION, THAT THEY
ARE AGAINST GOVERNMENT CONTROL,
AND YET HERE THEY ARE PUSHING TO
FORCE THE GOVERNMENT INTO THE
MOST PRIVATE MOMENTS OF A
PERSON'S LIFE.
SOMEONE MAKING THE DECISION WHAT
TO DO WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR
FAMILY.
PEOPLE CHOOSES TO MARRY THE
PERSON THEY LOVE, PEOPLE
CHOOSING TO ENGAGE IN INTIMATE
RELATIONS WITH THE PERSON THEY
LOVE.
THIS IS GOVERNMENT OVERREACH AT
AN EXTREME SO I AM CONCERNED
ABOUT SOMETHING HAPPENING AT THE
FEDERAL LEVEL TO CREATE A
FEDERAL BAN, NOT JUST ON
ABORTION RIGHTS BUT ON OTHER
RIGHTS THAT WE ENJOY, AND THAT'S
WHY I CALL ON CONGRESS RIGHT
NOW.
IF YOU BELIEVE IN THESE RIGHTS
IF YOU SUPPORT THE RIGHT TO
PRIVACY, THE RIGHT TO CONTROL
DECISIONS MADE ABOUT YOUR BODY,
THEN CONGRESS NEEDS TO ACT AND
START INTRODUCING BILLS THAT
WOULD PROTECT THESE RIGHTS GOING
FORWARD.
>> WHY ARE YOU RUNNING FOR OFFICE?
>> THE SHORT ANSWER IS I AM
RUNNING FOR OFFICE BECAUSE BEING
PART OF THE FIGHT FOR MARRIAGE
EQUALITY CHANGED ME PROFOUNDLY,
AND I EXPERIENCED FIRSTHAND WHAT
IT MEANS TO MAKE THE WORLD A
BETTER PLACE.
WHAT IT MEANS TO HAVE A POSITIVE
IMPACT ON OUR NATION, AND THAT'S
WHY I'M RUNNING FOR OFFICE.
I HAVE TO KEEP FIGHTING TO MAKE
THINGS BETTER.
I HAVE TO FIGHT FOR EVERYONE.
FAR TOO MANY PEOPLE IN OUR
NATION ARE EXCLUDED.
FAR TOO MANY PEOPLE IN OUR
NATION ARE MARGINALIZED.
FAR TOO MANY PEOPLE IN OUR
NATION ARE NOT PARTS OF WE THE
PEOPLE, AND THE WAY WE CHANGE
THAT IS BY HAVING PEOPLE WHO
BELIEVE IN THOSE VALUES, PEOPLE
WHO BELIEVE IN HUMAN AND CIVIL
RIGHTS.
THE WAY WE CHANGE THAT IS BY
HAVING THOSE PEOPLE RUN AND BY
HAVING PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE IN
THOSE THINGS.
VOTERS VOTING FOR THOSE
CANDIDATES.
THAT'S WHY I'M RUNNING.
I HAVE TO BE PART OF MAKING
THINGS BETTER AND FAR TOO MANY
ELECTED OFFICIALS HAVE FORGOTTEN
THAT THEY ARE PUBLIC SERVANTS.
THEY ARE NOT SERVING THE PUBLIC.
THEY ARE HARMING THE PUBLIC.
THEY'RE NOT DOING THINGS THAT
ACTUALLY HELP CREATE JOBS OR
MAKE THEIR CONSTITUENTS' DAILY
LIVES BETTER.
THEY ARE MAKING THINGS WORSE FOR