Marriage Quote by Pete Coors

Coors is performing a familiar American balancing act: a nod to constitutional restraint paired with a culturally loaded conclusion. The opening confession of skepticism signals moderation, even humility. It’s a rhetorical seatbelt. By admitting discomfort with “using the Constitution this way,” he positions himself as someone wary of legal overreach, not as someone eager to police private life. That framing matters because it tries to convert a moral preference into a procedural principle.

Then comes the pivot: “but I also believe marriage is between a man and a woman.” The “also” quietly equalizes two very different claims: one about legal method, the other about social hierarchy. The sentence suggests that opposing same-sex marriage isn’t merely a value judgment; it’s a cautious, civic-minded posture. It’s political jujitsu: recast a contested cultural stance as respect for democratic process.

The final clause, “the courts shouldn’t legislate this matter,” taps into a long-running conservative critique of judicial activism. Subtext: if courts recognize same-sex marriage, they’re not interpreting rights; they’re inventing them. This is especially potent coming from a businessman, for whom legitimacy often tracks with procedural clarity and institutional predictability. Yet the line also sidesteps a key reality of civil rights fights: courts routinely do “legislate” in the sense that they enforce constitutional guarantees when majorities refuse.

Contextually, the quote reads like an artifact of the pre-Obergefell era, when marriage equality debates were still being fought state by state and in courts. It’s an attempt to occupy the respectable middle: concede uncertainty about the legal tool, hold firm on the cultural endpoint, and outsource responsibility to “the people” while keeping the status quo intact.