David Hyde Pierce On His Marriage, Prop 8 Anger (VIDEO)

David Hyde Pierce talked about his anger over Prop 8 on "The View" on Thursday.

Pierce married his longtime partner last year, but has always stayed quiet about his personal life until now.

"Brian and I always kept a low profile, we didn't hide our lives," Pierce told the ladies. "We got married very quietly last October 24 and thought that was fine, and then suddenly the state of California said, 'no it's not.'"

Pierce went on to say, "Can you imagine if you're married the people in your state getting together and saying, no you're not... It was a very angry-making decision... It's none of your business."



WATCH:

Follow HuffPo Entertainment On Twitter!

Send us tips! Write us at [e-mail] if you see any newsworthy or notable TV moments. Read more about our media monitoring project here and click here to join the Media Monitors team.

Comments

[happycat]

It was great up until that dingaling Elizabeth, cut David off at the knees in order to discuss something more milquetoast and unsissylike such as their work in Alzheimers. It really has become the Elizabeth Hasselbeck show. Oh, I wish that people would riot in the streets protesting her presence on the show.

[jillsond]

Thank you! She's a complete waste of space.

[happycat]

Isn't she? BTW, Still feeling like the walking death. That is my new term for this flu!

[grdavis1019]

Time for the Hollywood stars to bankroll the gay marriage movement the same way the righ wingers banded together to bankroll the anit-gay marriage movement if they believe so strongly about it. Put your money where your mouth is.

[ladylove114]

Anybody that watches the show regularly know they all cut guests off to get on another subject. They are very limited timewise with each segment. They tell them what to cover with each guests. I watch this show everyday so I see this happening a lot. David really seems to have a good relationship with Elisabeth. They need a conservative on the show. Sometimes I think they keep her around because she is not the best conservative they could find. Makes Joy look smarter. E.D. Hill subbed one day for Elisabeth and did a great job. The other girls didn't argue much with her. She is very educated and spoke very well.

[happycat]

No, Elizabeth cut David off. It was obvious she wanted to change the subject. The View does not need a conservative voice if that voice is as dumb and as ill-informed as Elizabeths'

[OKnight]

the american love affair with bimbo barbie dolls continues...

[Eriq]

You go for it, David!! Tell 'em like it is, and we ALL thank you!!

[witz]

I think it's hard for David to be patient on this one, but it helps to understand California's makeup. First of all, there are a lot of cultures that just don't get the whole equality thing (and you'd think they would). Second you've got the lunatic religious fringe . . . and there's a lot in California! The Mormons go out in droves and litter the streets with signs to squelch equality. And again it's hard to understand, but when these well meaning folk come from a culture that is so boundaryless sexually, they want to keep a tight clamp on anything that would bring up their own terrifying issues.

Gay marriage will pass in 2010 when it comes to vote in California.

[MissingAmerica]

I am with him completely! Congratulations on his marriage and I guess all we can do is pray that sanity someday comes to this country and the realization the the citizens of this country are guaranteed equality. Gays and lesbians are citizens who pay taxes just like the rest of us. What they want to do with their personal lives is nobody else's business. I am still relling that the Supreme Court rules in favor of ignorance and hatred. I'm ashamed!

[johnbdonovan]

Stupidest idea of the century: Marriage equality. Marriage has ALWAYS been about giving people special honor if they agree to raise children with a mother type of influence combined with a father type of influence. Equality is for things in the bill of rights -- live-and-let-live kinds of things like freedom of speech, worship, and assembly.

[FrankieAnon]

So, I shouldn't be married --or I am not legitimately married -- according to your logic because I cannot bear children? So my dad and his wife, who were married after their child-bearing years, are not legitimately married? What a crock.

[NoSillyName]

Stupid when the divorce rate is over 50%. So much for vows.

[cmfrey]

Actually, marriage has only most recently been about creating a nuclear family. For most of history it has been about property and ownership.

[jjasonham]

Except for that time when it was about combining power in powerful families, or just simply for status by having as many wives as you could afford.

[mjb5406]

So... childless married people (either by choice or not) are not really married?

Obviously, the "mother type of influence" and "father type of influence" you received didn't do you a bit of good.

[cloudminder]

would it be alright to manhandle a woman in order to advance gay rights?

Doug McKelway tried to do that:

http://www.queerty.com/doug-mckelway-still-really-really-wants-to-punch-mike-rogers-20090508/

[bluejoewho]

Any what exactly does this have to do with anything?

[brooklyncitizen]

I hope we get past this. Marriage became sacred now that the LGBT community wants in on it.

[Rockwell]

That's a great observation. We've got Vegas weddings, underwater and skydiving weddings. We've got easy no-fault divorce. We have prominent pundants, politicians and preachers cheating on their spouses or on their 3rd or 4th marriage and that was all just fine.

Soon as the LGBT community decided to join the club, now all the sudden its a sacred, holy institution that must be defended from this horrible assault.

Give me a freakin break.

[jbrantow]

Remember that game show a few years back "I want to marry a millionaire"

[mjb5406]

Absolutely. Until that happened, the religious wingnuts were pretty passive about it, but now they have their new homophobic bigoted battlecry.

[TrooAmerican]

I still think Both sides opposition to this solution has no excuse...

Marriage is steeped in religious history/terminology. Separation of church n state should Force the removal of the Term Marriage from government policies.
Change Marriage to Civil union for all legal purposes. Instead of a Marriage license, or permit, you get a License to a civil union for all couples.

For those religious intolerants, Their Churches or any religious institution can deliver civil unions along with term Marriage, whereas any local govt can deliver only civil unions, not marriage.
But Marriage being only the term used by religious groups to define a couple married under the eyes of whatever God and teachings they believe.

It gives everyone the rights they want, allows intolerant persons the right to bar gays / Les from their church, and to be "married" by them, and gives gays and lesb a path to follow to find a church that will accept them.

It also satisifies the fact that our Constitution separates Church and State and Marriage is a Religious process turned into a Civil process for practicality in Society.
It also satisifies Religious Freedom for those that dont want gays to be married by keeping their own specific denomination's policies in place for them. And it allows Freedom for those Religious groups that want to marry gays and lesb to do so at will.

[mjb5406]

Marriage has absolutely nothing to do with religion. Not only dd it begin as something sanctioned by governments, it is LICENSED by the government. You can be agnostic or an Atheist and be married; religion is out of the picture.

[Mysticalsister]

well said and too true.

we need to make that case LOUDER and more often.

[rini]

Ok, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here, but..

Am I the only one who's noticed this?

Several times, when watching clips from "The View" I have been disturbed by the synchronized/coordinated leg crossing. When they are sitting on the couch all those on the right cross the left leg over the right and the people on the left side of the couch cross the right leg over the left. I have seen it several times. I don't think I have watched a clip from The View without seeing this.

[Liz Church]

I have to say I am also dealing with my own anger over this issue. Having to beg people to vote for my marriage was beyond humiliating and frustrating. It also felt very unsafe. We tried to be as non-confrontational as possible and just pass out cards and say "Please vote no on Prop 8". Still, I had people scream at me. My wife's group handing out voter cards, one guy was spit on. Being spit on in America for asking to be treated like everyone else.

[Cycadeoidea]

I'm sorry. The days of Jim Crow should be behind us.

[Rahan]

A generation from now, people will look back incredulous that something like this actually happened in America. Kind of like the separate drinking fountains thing.
If history repeats itself, then you will not have to beg for long. A right is never lost that has someone demanding it.

[bluejoewho]

A generation from now the United States will not exist.

[Mysticalsister]

I feel you. thank you so much for trying.

[seachild]

deja vu

[LeeCalif]

One of the P.R. firm's partners:
Richard Wiebe is a partner of Schubert Flint Public Affairs. For more than three decades, Richard has developed and implemented strategic communications campaigns for statewide ballot initiatives and high-profile legislative issues in California and other states. On behalf of California’s leading business groups, he has built and managed diverse coalitions, which have shaped the outcome of the most contentious issues facing the state including healthcare, workers’ compensation, education, financial services privacy, insurance reform and tort reform.

The campaigns and legislative coalitions he has helped manage include: Workers’ Compensation Action Network, Californians Against Government Run Healthcare, Nevadans Against Frivolous Lawsuits, Californians Against the Wrong Prescription, Californians Against Unaccountable Taxes and Consumers Against Higher Insurance Rates (Washington State).

Shubert Flint's causes are primarily Pro-corporate Anti-consumer as in Tort Reform which is another way of saying businesses want no responsibility for releasing dangerous products, like China and lead painted toys.

[mjb5406]

um... so?

[LeeCalif]

Schubert Flint P.R. firm (SFPA)

The “Public Affairs Team of the Year” Award is one of the top three awards given by the AAPC. SFPA was honored for its
work on the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign.

[LeeCalif]

They've changed their website. It is now schubertpa.com

[InstantDogma]

The solution:
No more Marriage Lcense. You have a Cohabitation License instead, for everyone.
You want to get married, you go to a church. Marriage is a religiousd concept.
Less religion in Government is the solution.
Anything less is defrauding the homosexual community (they pay taxes right?)
Might even be a legal angle there.
S.

[Cycadeoidea]

The federal government bestows special legal benefits to married people. Dispense with that as well?

[IndependentMeans]

Absolutely. The Federal Government has no business recognizing "marriage", it is, respectfully, a religious. The Federal Government should only recognize civil unions nationwide, as that is what it is all about. A legal "civil" contract.

[Mo in VA]

Marriages were codified by governments because wives were considered chattel. Marriage established household ownership rights and rights of succession.

We just need civil marriage for all, and sacred marriage for those who want some religious blessing. People who get married by a cleric get civil divorces all the time, so the notion that marriage is not a change in civil status is as ridiculous as the thrice-divorced holy rollers whoclaim it's gay marriage that demeans the institution.

[Principaldad]

Actually, call all marriages "civil unions". That is what they really are under the law.

The word marriage acutally means two different things. It is a spiritual union, which is a definition that is many centuries old. However, it is also a legal partnership, a definition that has changed repeatedly and constantly. What a church calls a marriage is not the same as what a government calls a marriage are two different things.

For some reason people can't understand one word meaning two different things (even though that is common in English). So, the solution is to change the word and call all legal marriages "civil unions". Then everyone can be given the exact same rights under the law and the wingnuts can stop gabbing.

[KristaJulieva]

This is my ideal solution as well. Scrap the concept of civil marriages. Civil unions for everyone, as far as the government is concerned, and then if you want to get married in your religious tradition or even in some secular ceremony that you apply the term marriage to, that's up to you. But obviously marriage is a custom that has religious/personal and legal meanings and at this point in our culture those meanings are not identical to one another.

[mjb5406]

"Marriage is a religiousd (sic) concept."

Totally, absolutely wrong. It's a civil society concept.

[LeeCalif]

Let's give "credit" where credit is due.

The Public Relations firm of Schubert Flint Public Affairs Inc.with offices in Orange County
and Sacramento is responsible for this. schubertflintpa.com

[LeeCalif]

It's now schubertpa.com

[Agentlady007]

I acted with him in classes. He played my brother.

[cly]

That is really cool. He has always been a favorite of mine. I'm sorry he had to go public about this as it seems he is a very private person but I'm really glad he did.