The question seems to be asking whether or not more states should recognize this 'lifestyle' as a marital union. She answered the question without passing a judgement. Sadly she qualified the authority for her answer as being rooted in the values of her family and the way she was raised. Perhaps she was attempting to dodge passing judgement or identifying with Biblical beliefs....
Perhaps, too, we are assuming too much based upon her answer or the credentials of her academic choice. It would not be the first time a morally upright person, with values, enters adulthood and has yet to establish within her own relationship with God, the certainty and force of where she stands on issues which are socially volitile, and which most churches avoid discussion and teachings. I suppose if I search and googled I might find more info on her background which might give me a different picture.... but based upon what little has been presented here..... It was not the most glorious answer which might have been given... but it was probably appropriate to the level of her experience and familiarity with the issue and the secular context in which she was in competition with others.
She certainly did not give approval of marriage as being anything more or less than between a man and woman. She wasn't asked if it is right or wrong..... just whether or not states could pass laws..... and, in essence, she acknowledged that laws are passed by consensus of the voters.
The content of her answer, whether it is politically correct or not, should not be part of the decision in the contest. If anything, the question should not have been allowed as it was politically motivated and designed to divide and inflame regardless of answer. The objective in judgement with such questions is whether or not she maintained her composure, poise, and grace under fire...... which she did. Who did or did not agree with her answer should not be material to her placing in the contest.
Sometimes, we as Christians, have both opportunities and trials presented in taking part in the secular systems, which surround us and are a neccessary part of living in this world and participating in the work force etc. We can show our own maturity by remembering the lessons we've had in our own lives and displaying understanding and grace towards those who are younger and still processing their spiritual maturity. In the end..... would it have been better for a person with lessor values to stand where she stood and passed an open endorsement to the question? Essentially, if we're not careful with our criticism, we neither encourage younger Christians, but our critques can be destructive to their motivations and the opportunities which God might have intended for them to grow.
