>> i saw you. you looked great. you are doing a great job. >> they know how to treat a brotha over there. >> and you have more feed foot. it. >> laura: the o'reilly factor is on. tonight: >> what do we want? >> equality. >> hey hey, ho ho. [chanting] >> laura: supreme court just wrapped up oral arguments on same sex marriage. "time" magazine says the debate is over. gay marriage has won. we will take a look at the issue. [taps] should the government stop providing military funeral honors for some veterans? one newspaper columnist says yes. and you won't believe his reasoning. we will talk to him tonight. >> access to affordable healthcare regardless of our institution's religious beliefs. >> laura: some students at boston college in trouble

for passing out condoms on campus. now the aclu is threatening to get involved. caution, you are about to enter the no spin zone. and the factor begins right now. >> laura: hi, i'm laura ingraham in for bill o'reilly. thanks for watching us tonight. should the g.o.p. risk offending social conservatives? that's the subject of this evening's talking points memo. today, on the "new york times" web page, tom ed sell, who has spent much of the last 30 years covering politics for the "the washington post" and the new republic, has some advice for the g.o.p. he draws upon some recent polling data to argue that, quote: the republican party can afford to marginalize christian right leaders because evangelical/social conservatives are not going to vote democratic. thus, republicans can, as

he puts it, concede defeat in the culture war in the hopes of picking up some more socially liberal voters. mr. edsell might want to check with governor mike huckabee who knows a thing or two about evangelical voters. huckabee suggested that evangelicals will, quote, take a walk from the g.o.p. if the party ends up supporting gay marriage. he might also want to consider the 1996 presidential election when bill clinton carried red states such as kentucky, tennessee, west virginia, missouri, and, of course, louisiana. president clinton's wife is going to be probably the likely nominee in 2016. and i think it's safe to say that the clintons with their deep roots and understanding in arkansas know how to reach evangelical voters. especially if the g.o.p. acts like it doesn't want them. i would also note that in both 2008 and 2012, the g.o.p. did nominate presidential candidates who weren't really that you will popular with social conservatives.

and those candidates faired poorly in fall campaigns, next time around conservative voters might just stay home or even throw their support to a democrat who they think is more sympathetic to the middle class. but, of course, the question of what sort of culture our children are going to inherit is a lot more important than the results of any one election. the social issues aren't merely a political football to be used by grasping politicians seeking to win power. they really do establish the framework for many aspects of american life from our schools to our churches, and, of course, to our families. these are very serious matters. they should be taken seriously. so instead of worrying so much about political tactics, republicans might want to consider focusing on what they truly believe in. and what type of country they want to have. the time has come for a serious debate within the g.o.p. over all of the social issues with all sides making the best case for what they think is right. only then can the g.o.p. reach a new consensus and

then maybe move forward in a united effort to reach the rest of america. and, by the way, back to tom edsall a little research here. interestingly, just before the 2006 elections, he wrote a book arguing that the g.o.p. will, quote: maintain over the long run, a thin, but durable margin of victory, closed quote. the g.o.p. lost both the house and the senate in the 2006 midterm election, tom. and the g.o.p. is supposed to take political advice from this guy? and that's the memo. and now on to the top story. an outrageous column in the st. louis post dispatch which all but says it is open season on war veterans? that's what some think. long-time columnist bill mccleaned opines that since the government is so broke we should stop providing military funeral honors. mcclelland writes the following, quote: bare in mind that most americans

did nothing heroic, they served and that's laudable. it hardly seems necessary to provide them wall military honors after they have died, questioned closed quote. joining us is bill mcclellan and bob maginnis. all right, mr. mcclellan, you have been hammered for this column. part of the thing that people are thinking is, look, last year we saw, again, planned parenthood get, what? $400 million from the federal government for sex education for teens and so forth. large -- that is a lot of money for a place that makes a lot of money on abortion. this year we are spending, what, 880,000 to study the sex activities of snails? and why don't we cut those things before we start cutting funeral honors for veterans? >> well, if i was in charge of things, we would cut a whole bunch of stuff.

we would cut out here in missouri the live bugler because 20 to $25 cost was too much. one of the buglers came to me and we were talking about it and i found out that the cost is $400, approximately, and we have over 700 of them a month. and i thought why don't we just left the vfw, the american legion, the marine corps league take care of this and that was the point of the column. and the column said that, you know, the way you cut a budget is you take -- you cut little programs that might be nice but you don't need and you trim bigger ones. and it's been taking taken as despicable attack on veterans and, you know, i think it's almost amusing. >> laura: have you advocated for other similar conservative oriented spending cuts on, let's say, green energy and some of the little things that i just mentioned with the

snails and the planned parenthood or is it only limited to cutting money when it is spent on veterans' funerals? >> no. as a matter of fact, i advocated cutting money from that -- the president's act where all the former presidents, i mean, that's costing us $3.7 million a year but generally i don't write budgetary stories. i only wrote this because the buglers came to me. >> laura: i think, bob of the buglers i imagine we could probably on this show tonight cover the buglers for everybody for the next year if that's what we wanted to do. >> that would be good. go ahead. let me just get bob in this. >> no, i. >> laura: go ahead. i was going to let him go but you can go and finish up your thought. >> okay. i was going to say it's hard to cut anything when everybody always says well don't cut this program. >> laura: i understand. >> you can cut more over there. >> laura: you know it's going to be inflammatory. when you wrote this column, i mean, of all the things you can write about, is

that really the most pressing issue facing the people of st. louis how much the buglers cost? i mean, i would imagine medicaid fraud. i would imagine disability fraud in this country. the fraud on green jobs that was sold to the american people as some windfall of productivity and ended up being a total joke. that's real money. this is not real money. that's real money. >> i think you misunderstand what i do laura. i write four columns a week and i don't try to pick the most pressing issues facing america. >> laura: why did you do the heroic. put the line in about they are not all heros? why did you write that. >> it's true. i'm one of them. i served in vietnam in the marine corps. very unheroically, my father was on gwatney canal. >> so he would get a military funeral. >> no. i would say in f. my father had wanted a military funeral he could have gone to the vfw.

i didn't get a military funeral. >> as you i would hope acknowledge an earned entitlement. we have had millions of when we put them in the ground, this is a country expressing deep gratitude for the freedoms we enjoy in this land, these people whether they were like you and went to vietnam and didn't see hostile fire, that's beside the point. they set aside their entire lives in order to go out there and serve their country and it had an effect. it had a great effect. my father-in-law served in the second world war. he earned a bronze star. he didn't see really a lot of hostile fire. but, yet, his generation dying a thousand a day, 365,000 a year. yes, it is expensive. we only have less than 1% of the american public that has ever sacrificed at all by serving in their armed forces. we need to really revere this service. because it keeps us all free. >> i would say that whether

you peel potatoes as a cook or a repairman. >> absolutely. >> laura: every job in the military is important because without the cook the forward combat operating officer can't do his job. everybody is important. >> the tip of the spear is less than 20 pierce. most people don't fight at all. back there pushing supplies and supporting what's going on. that's what's important. >> my point, my point is i think a lot of the guys are like me. when i got out, i went to college under the gi bill and i feel like i'm square uncle sams. i don't think the taxpayers need anything more. military funeral. can i can have the vfw. >> bill, i approach. >> bill, i appreciate your service and i appreciate every man and woman that served this country honorably. we need them and we need more today. >> i think we can cover the bugler somehow. gentleman, it's great to see both of you have. thanks so much. next on the run down

provocative story gay marriage debate is over. is that fair reporting? tiger woods ad morally offensiviviviviviv

>> laura: in the impact segment tonight. the supreme court heard article axments this week on two gay marriage cases. we can expect rulings to come down probably in late june. despite that time line the cover of "time" magazine has declared gay marriage already won. joining me to react in our new york studio is cathy areu a "the washington post" magazine contributing editor and here with me in d.c. is fox news contributor sandy rios. let's start with you, cathy. the way i look at it without a doubt polls have showing increasing support for gay marriage among young people. there is some questions whether the polling oversamples support as we saw before prop 8 was voted

on. it showed that actually prop 8 was not as popular and, yet, it passed, right? >> right. >> laura: there are some people afraid to say they are not for gay marriage, whatever the case may be. we do have statistics to look at. 31 states ban same sex unions in state constitutions only had four recently who said yes maine fine minnesota and so forth. the states have spoken and the states so far haven't shown universal or even majority support for same sex unions. so what's going on with "time" magazine. >> "time" magazine is right. gay marriage has won in so many ways it's an organ mick movement. something gay activists did not think was possible 20 years ago. no one was pushing for gay marriage and 20 years have passed and now we see that the public wants it. it's four to one youth in america wants gay marriage. they are for it they don't have a problem with it people born after 1980 have no problem with gay

marriage. so, organically it's happened. >> laura: i don't think all people born after that year have no problem with it i don't think that's accurate. >> many. >> laura: we have 41 states in the united states of america today that either banned same sex marriage or provide for domestic partnership. >> interracial relationship was banned. >> laura: we argued that at the supreme court and we are not arguing the merits one way or another simply the idea, sandy, we will go to you that this is established, again, the culture has spoken. we have popular television characters. we have popular television hosts. they are gay, nobody seems to care. gay marriage has spoken. it's done the culture has spoken,. >> i don't believe that i remember when i was old enough to remember what it was like in when abortion was popular. media all over the abortion issue. everybody loves it, the supreme court has passed it they never talked about anything about what was happening in abortion clinics. what was happening to the process, the procedure. and so everybody was well,

yeah, i guess i don't know that there is anything wrong with it until the other side came out o. pro-life people, people that felt like was sacred stayed with it and finally the truth of abortion came out. and so attitudes are changing. >> laura: country is still split on abortion. but your point is there is not an overwhelming majority of people. >> majority of americans don't like abortion. >> laura: without any restrictions. >> same thing will happen. our kids are the product of public schools. one way street and public schools. no wonder they poll the way they do. when they hear the other side of the story it, it will change. only nine states. >> laura: if the supreme court does rule in favor of same sex marriage either in california or affirming that doma is unconstitutional. if they make that decision, do you think the fight goes on? is there going to be any politicians out there? do you see any politicians really arguing against gay marriage? >> politicians were dropping like flies on the

pro-life movement, too. >> i think that when the truth is told, the whole story is told, people will change their mind. >> laura: cathy, one thing that justice kagan brought up on tuesday during the prop 8 argument, sort of surprising from justice kagan. she was saying well it is percolating. it perks. issues like this perk through the populace. and it's percolating now but, she seemed herself very concerned that this might not be yet the time to step in on a case like proposition 8. i don't know how she is ultimately going to vote. but even the "new york times" "the washington post" reporting the justices are very weary about stepping in and declaring that all these states, 41 states are wrong and how they define marriage justices even the liberal ones a broad based ruling i don't see it happening. >> this came out of nowhere. it really is a movement that came out of nowhere. >> laura: right. >> that's basically what she is saying.

it's organic. it's going to be slow. who knows how this is going to turn out. >> laura: you are saying who knows how it's going to turn out you are defending "time" magazine saying it's over. >> it has won. i don't know if it's going to win tomorrow or in june or if it's going to win next year it has won. seeing same sex couple kissing on the cover of a mainstream population is not alarming to anybody. >> laura: i don't want my kids when they go by magazine racks i don't care if it's gay or straight i don't want heterosexuals. >> two people in love. i don't have a problem with it. >> laura: it's not about gay. >> i have small children. >> laura: in your face push, push, push. >> i think this is a big overreach it will have a opposite reaction what you are talking about. we are talking about the impression. all one way. i want to give you an example. when you saw the supreme court protests covered this week. you didn't see the guy who was dressed up like a devil holding a cross, holding a sign that says you know,

heaven is going to be -- or hell is going to be a lot of fun going to be marvelous i bet hell is fabulous. you didn't see that image, did you? >> pro. he is a cross dresser. >> laura: could have been someone making. >> there were lesbians and gays dancing with him. actually, the image was piercing. >> laura: cathy, can you weigh in on this. we have to be careful on this because i think all human beings should have dignity and respect across the board. people should have a conversation about. this a lot of folks who are -- maybe they they are orthodox jews evangelical christians, muslims, these are good people. they are people of good belief and go standing, they don't want to feel like now they're the ones ostracized or they can't be part of civil dialogue today and i think that's what they are concerned about. and i think they are very worried about a proclamation that their core beliefs are now hating or discriminating when that's not how they feel.

>> i don't think it has anything to do with religion it has to do with people who are in love who are going to be allowed to be married and have children and raise happy families. this is all that's happening. that's all that's happen has nothing to do with religion. >> i predict lawsuits against catholic schools and lawsuits against muslim schools. >> >> you know, it's going to be bad news for christians. >> we'll do that on our -- great to see both of you. thanks for being with us. later, should the government get out of marriage business all together? that might be the answer. dr. keith a blow with controversial thoughts on that. first, some boston college students are now in trouble for distributing condoms on campus. and now the aclu is rush aring to their defense. we're coming right back.

layer lawyer in the unresolved problem segment tonight another example of religion under attack in academic settings. the latest comes from boston college a catholic jesuit university. some students there part of a sexual health group are handing out condoms on campus which is a violation of school policy. the condom handout is part of a larger crusade. >> i support women's access to affordable birth control. because it's more than just contraception. it's medical disease like endo meet trio sis and ovarian cysts. >> because i have the right to my own body. >> because men don't have the trite legislate women's bodies. >> because women should have access to affordable healthcare regardless of their institution's religious' beliefs. >> last week the students were warned by college officials that they could face disciplinary action if they continue their condom

campaign. no surprise the aclu is now threatening legal action against b.c. saying the school is violating the students' civil rights. joining me now from new york is christina page, she is a reproductive rights activist. christina here is my take, i'm a catholic, full disclosure here. if you decide to go to a catholic institution of high learning, you understand that it is is a catholic institution of higher learning. and you could go to some state school. you gokd to other private secular colleges. but you decided to go to, in this case, boston college. then you get to boston college and you are a student and you are like i don't really like boston college's policies. so i'm going to willfully violate them and then i'm going to expect everybody to drag their crying towels out and explain that my civil rights are being violated. it's a private institution it. it can make whatever disciplinary rules and regulations it wishes to and the case law supports that.

it does look to me that if the students have r. violating any of the code of ethics for boston college. if this is a violation, then any student that would be going into a pharmacy to bacon dom for -- would be in the same violation. we're not asking -- >> laura: christina on campus i don't mean to jump in but got to be very clear. a distinction. you can do whatever you want. if you want to get a create crate full of condoms go get them. the catholic school can't say anything about that if you want to be on the pill, on the pill. on campus the rules of the institution apply. go there or another institution if you don't like it? >> listen, this is a small percentage of catholics who oppose contraception in our country. the vast majority, 82% of catholics support contraceptive access. >> laura: they are in violation of their church's teaching, you are right about that. >> 98% in violation of church teaching practice family planning. what we see here is the

church and, really a faction way out of step. >> laura: wait. >> catholic americans live their lives. >> laura: christinena, you are saying a faction of the church is against the use of contraception. actually, that is at the core of the church's teaching about the family. and i understand the secular. >> it's a very recent teaching and a very controversial one. and one in which- >> laura: here is a news flash for you. you don't have to be a catholic. no one is forcing these kids to go to boston college. let me say that i'm shocked that boston college actually threatening disciplinary action because most of these catholic schools are so far beyond even being close to the catholic doctrine on these issues but in this case they actually do care. would you think it was okay, for instance, that usheba university for skin heads to enroll and demand their rights to express their offensive speech or

pass out pamphlets that are offensive and hateful denying the holocaust would that be okay at besheba university. >> i don't think they are comparable. >> laura: they involve the institution's right. >> patient at catholic hospital shouldn't have to be subjected to all catholic doctrine. same with employees there. the vast majorities of catholic colleges and catholic hospitals aren't catholic. yet, they are subject to these rules. >> laura: on campus, again, listen very closely. they can go and buy as much contraception as they want off campus, if you are on campus and you are a student and you you are enrolled and you implicitly agree to abide by the precepts of the university or college. if you disagree with them i understand that i get it. >> the most dangerous time in a person's life. >> laura: can't do it not going to happen. >> most dangerous dangerous crime here. >> laura: you disagree with the catholic church it's.

>> person's life and going to acquire std's are in college. >> laura: plenty more ahead as the factor continues this evening. actress darryl hannah enters the no spin zone. you do n n n n n i was having trouble getting out of bed in the morning because my back hurt so bad. the sleep number bed conforms to you. i wake up in the morning with no back pain. i can adjust it if i need to...if my back's a little more sore. and by the time i get up in the morning, i feel great! if you have back pain, toss and turn at night or wake up tired with no energy, the sleep number

bed could be your solution. the sleep number bed's secret is it's air chambers which provide ideal support and put you in control of the firmness. and the bed is perfect for couples because each side adjusts independently to their unique sleep number. here's what clinical research has found: ® 93% of participants experienced back-pain relief. ® 90% reported reduced aches and pains. ® 87% fell asleep faster and enjoyed more deep sleep. for study summaries, call this number now. we'll include a free dvd and brochure about the sleep number bed including prices, and models plus a free $50 savings card. and how about this? steel springs can cause uncomfortable pressure points. but the sleep number bed contours to your body. imagine how good you'll feel when your muscles relax and you fall into a deep sleep! i'm not just a back surgeon, i'm also a back patient.

i sleep on the sleep number bed myself and i highly recommend it to all of my patients. need another reason to call? the sleep number bed costs about the same as an innerspring but lasts twice as long. so if you want to sleep better or find relief for your bad back, call now. call the number on your screen for your free information kit with dvd, brochure and price list. call right now and you'll also receive a $50 savings card just for inquiring about the sleep number bed. ask about our risk-free 30-night in-home trial. call now for your free information kit and a free $50 savings card. call now!

where do you think you're going? is your body holding you back? i want to go running. not with that knee, you're not. i'm fine. fight for your mobility. visit anationinmotion.org. a message from the american academy of orthopaedic surgeons. >> laura: in the factor flashback segment tonight, actress daryl hannah is an environ mintle activists she believes fossil fuels are causing global warming and action must be taken to switch energy sources throughout the world. she is also the executive

producer of a documentary called greedy lying bastards which basically attacks the fossil fuel industry. bill recently spoke with the actress about her activism. >> bill: i want a cleaner planet i have always said that. >> oh my god that's the best news i have heard on tv. >> bill: you should know i'm not a big fan of the oil companies. we are getting hosed at the --p and they membership manipulate prices all day long. i live in a modest house long island beaver cleaver could live there. normal house i have got to heat it with oil. >> no you don't. >> bill: tell me what i should be eating -- heating it with. >> do you have solar panels? >> bill: i looked into it do you know how expensive it would be. >> i do. many states are participating in these leasing programs. and you can actually lease them for -- you show them what your electric bill is, they charge you less than your electric bill and they put the solar panels on your house for you so they own them and you just lease

them. >> bill: you have got to drill a hole in your house and things like that. the construction is. >> no, they pay for the installation. all you do is you pay your monthly bill. and they make. >> bill: sign a contract with them. you would recommend solar here. >> that's one way. there is many options. >> bill: what else? >> it depends. if we are talking specifically in long island or regionally it's different in different regions so in some places wind is better. also, if you decide that you really want to use liquid fuel, there are alcohol burners that can heat homes. >> bill: alcohol? i just pour a six pack in there what do i do. >> almost. basically it's closer to old style. >> bill: come and put the alcohol thing in and give you booze to put in it. >> you can can. you can organize deliveries, yes, you can. >> bill: are you sure? they advertise everything under the sun out there. you know, solar panels, i have seen. they have solar panels. >> solar panels, wind mills. >> i haven't heard anybody

saying i will come to your house with alcohol. i have heard that but not in this context, all right? no liquid fuels, basically we started making alcohol fuel back when we realized that it was too laborious to go to the coast to get away whale to lamp oil o. every guy and his toothless brother had a still. they would drink the best and use the rest as fuel. >> bill: you believe this alcohol based fuel and solar panels is the solution to -- >> -- it's a combination. there are a multitude of combinations and the most important thing when you are talking about any kind of a liquid biofuel is the feed stock. now, i obviously recommend using waste. you don't want to use something that's energy intensive and fuel intensive like corn. >> bill: i flunked chemistry. i'm going to again look into the solar panel thing. the last thing i did the cost so prohibitive it was

crazy. >> look at a company longevity that leases the solar panel so you actually. >> bill: leasing solar panel. write that down for me. now the car. i can't fit into the little honda thing that has the plug. all right? and i'm really, i'm not real good with machines i have got tough enough time driving the regular car. what do i do? >> find the most efficient car that you are comfortable with because the best mileage. >> bill: ig have a pretty good one that does that american g.m. car, yeah. it's a fuel injected car i assume it's post 1980s car? >> bill: brand new car, yes. >> okay. once again you can use alcohol fuel. >> bill: alcohol? if it's not a diesel you can use alcohol fuel muhammad the guy who runs the gas station -- he doesn't have alcohol. he does but he doesn't put it in cars. >> where do i get it. >> you live in a home. so you have room for a trash can? >> yes. >> so you have room for your own fueling station. >> i can make my own fueling station.

zoning people are going to love that. >> it's nontoxic. >> bill: i would have to figure all of this out? >> yes and nonflammable you could drop a match and the match go out. >> come to my house and help me. because i'm really hopeless. >> if you will share that information with your viewers, i would be happy to. >> bill: of course, they are hearing it now. >> okay. >> bill: bottom line you believe this is all viable that we can get away from oil and gas and we can do. >> we can we have the solutions available to us. we don't have the political will and legislative will. >> i think folks would do it if it was convenient. we are all busy. >> and available. i agree 100%. >> bill: if i put a still in my house it's going to blow up and i'm going to die. >> that's right. i wouldn't trust with you a still. the thing is we have the tools available to us to make the shift to clean regenerative energy. >> bill: i'm going to check it out. if i find something, i'm going to report it you are very well-intentioned thank you very much. >> thank you for having me. >> laura: when we come when we come back, should the

government get out of marriage business all together? keith ablow says yes. he will be here to

>> laura: thanks for staying with us. i'm laura ingraham in for bill o'reilly. in the factor follow up segment tonight, as the supreme court considers two gay marriage cases. some folks are saying that the government should get out of the marriage business all together. one of those people is our own dr. keith ablow, a psychiatrist and fox news contributor. and he joins us now from boston. okay, doc. tell us what your distelzweig diagnosis is here. diagnosis is here. you saw this play out. getting petroleum meld by pro-gay ads. culture is knocking on the doors of american families on this issue. and meanwhile you have this doma, the defense of marriage act and this

long-standing stephanie angel that a man and a woman together is good for sewed what is your take on this. >> here is my take. with these cases reaching the supreme court i don't think states nor the federal government should be involved in marriage at all. we shouldn't be expressing. the government shouldn't be expressing a preference for whether two people of any gender get together. and call themselves married. that should be a matter for their religious institutions, gatherings of friends, and then you simply do an agreement financially as to what the world will look like if you decide not to be quote, unquote, married. we're not canine. we are not beagles, we don't need to head to town hall or city hall for a marriage license. the government should never have been involved in these personal matters and that's why it's coming back to bite us. because, frankly, laura. it's just completely illogical to me and i think highly prejudicial that a state or the federal

government would say two men can marry but not two women and man. three people can be in love. if love is the arbiter then three people can marry. >> laura: that's coming. >> i would assume. >> laura: some polyannemarie group is waiting in line to file their own petition if, indeed, this doma is tossed out as it looks like it probably will be or prop 8 overturned because, they are arguing that look, if it's not man and woman. if that's not traditional why is our love any less valid than two same sex people? why? i don't really know what argument. i think you are right, made against that why is two so special? why not four? why not one? why -- didn't that marry marry the eiffel tower in france some story about that did you see the french liberal french like several hundred thousand people this past weekend marching against same sex unions

pushed by the socialist government in france. even in france this turmoil about this issue is state and church involved in it. >> we have a very simple formula that we could adopt which is this. the government is out of the marriage business. that should be the case. that means no preferential treatment at tax time. no preferential treatment for married folks by insurance companies. everyone should be treated as an individual. you go to your. >> laura: good for us singles? >> it's good for you singles? >> laura: get nothing today. like no benefits. single with kids you are kind at the low end of the toe tum pole. >> that shouldn't be the case. >> laura: dr. ablow, society has determined over millennial that the marital compact whether it's done civilly common law marriage it's good. right? i guess it was good because the judgment was generally made by the culture. maybe that's changed that a man and a woman raising children is a good thing. we want more people. we want procreation.

it's stability. people tend to be married. i think don't they live longer you are the doctor they suffer from less depression, loneliness, et cetera, et cetera. those are the things. they want to encourage more of it like they want to encourage businesses to invest to get tax credits if you invest in certain types of technologies. that's the argument. good for society. we can give tax credits for all sorts of things that we think are good for society. >> people are voting with their feet. number one, most people get divorced. and. >> laura: i don't think that's right. most people get divorced? >> most divorce rate is close to 50% or a little above. >> laura: that includes second time marriages though, dr. ablow. i'm such an expert in marriage. i'm not an expert at all. i shouldn't be speaking. >> no, you have a lot of good thoughts on this topic because you are a student of culture. right now the culture is saying number one the divorce rate is is skyrocketing. number two in dr. ablow's office among the top three reasons that people get depressed and anxious and

think they don't want to much live until 90 because their marriages are failing. thirdly the culture is marching. now they are saying men and men women and women soon to be five men and one woman at that point the government should say we are out of it. >> laura: it is coming. i'm glad. >> it's coming so we're done. go to your church. go to your temple, go to your polygamous temple, wherever you want to go. go do it. >> polygamy is back. dr. ablow good to talk to you. thank you very much. check out bill o'reilly.com this easter weekend. killing lincoln or kennedy from his web site you get a free factor mug as a great deal. nike comes under fire for new tiger woods ad. is it sending offensive

>> laura: in the back of the book segment tonight, glorifying professional athletes. nike is drawing criticism for this new online ad featuring tiger woods. with the tag line winning takes care of everything. nike says the ad is a salute to woods' athletic performance. the golfer regained his number one ranking this week. critics say that the spot is inappropriate and sends a bad message. in light of woods' bad past behavior. so do morals even matter in sports or in life anymore for that matter? or is it all about winning? joining us now to discuss from atlanta lower are a reef a marketing expert and from l.a. michelle fields correspondent for next generation tv. let's talk about it first, michelle, with you. because, everybody makes mistakes in their lives, obviously. no one is perfect. tiger woods is not perfect. he was deafind for a long time because of his talent came crashing down to earth.

new ad appears. new relationship with lindsay lohan. >> all down hill. >> lindsey vaughn. >> i always say lohan. >> that would have been a problem. >> that would have been a good story for tonight. right? so, winning takes care of everything. is that kind of taking it a little bit too far, a little too could you tell use? >> i absolutely think it's taking it too far. by saying that winning takes care of everything, they are not just saying that it takes care of his public persona. they're saying it takes care of the fact that he cheated on his wife with multiple women. that his children are now living in -- with divorced parents. i think that's sending an awful message to the youth of america. specifically to the young men that you can disrespect a woman. can you cheat on her but all you have got it do is win and make some money and then that takes care of everything. i think that's a very, very awful message. >> laura: we have seen society time and again in recent years, not really look the other way. people, i guess, don't seem to care whether it's bill clinton.

we have mark stanford back in politics. this kind of behavior seems to be tolerated. if you are a professional athlete, you are given maybe a little bit more leeway and especially if you are good. if he was down like bogeying every single hole. people would be focusing on the past bad act. new girlfriend chime in here whenchts does change everything for tiger woods. nike is right it has changed his whole world. everybody said he is a has about and not going anywhere. winning has brought him back. he is now looking at the winning the masters potentially in just a few weeks. listen, nike isn't talking -- they didn't say he was husband of the year. everybody knows he is not. nobody is perfect. that's the reality we live in. you just talked about how many people are getting divorced. divorce is the reality. for tiger woods what they're celebrating and what people think about when they look at him is golf. he has worked harder. he has dedicated himself a new swing, a new coach. he is putting --

>> they knew what he they were doing. >> exactly they knew what they were doing. they were saying that he is a winner today on the golf course. and that's what nike is. >> come on. >> now, girls, hold on. one at a time. michelle, maybe i'm just -- maybe i'm being a little cynical here. nike is probably among the best branding machines in the corporate america today. worldwide. amazing brands, right? they know how to brand. they are very smart over at nike. i have a nice theory. michelle you can chime. in wouldn't it have been really cool if it just so happened to slip that nike was considering that tag line and tiger woods came forward and said, you know, i love nikey, i love my association, but it doesn't matter more than everything. it doesn't take care of everything. in fact, i made some big mistakes. i'm not happy about those mistakes but i'm glad i'm number one. i think tiger woods would have done a great job. >> tiger woods has said that nike didn't make up this tag line. this is a quote. >> did he come out an

condemn this ad? >> no. >> laura: one at a time. >> he has used this quote since 2008 when people berate him and say are you worried about number one? what are you doing? and he says winning takes care of everything. it silences the critics who are complaining about his golf play. what he is doing or not doing. >> laura: that has ha double meaning. it's a double meaning. >> when you are talking about everything, when you are talking about everything, you are talking about everything. his children, his family, everything going on at home. i think that sends a bad message. but, look, i like the idea of competitiveness and winning. i think that our competitive spirit is dying in this country. everyone gets a gold trophyy, everyone gets a sticker. our government takes care of us from cradle to grave. there is no incentive to work hard because then you enter into a new tax bracket and the government takes that away. >> that's why we need to celebrated winners. tiger woods is a winner we need to celebrate him for that win. >> you can let me talk? >> there is a difference

between being competitive and also being competitive having values and morality. there is a difference there. >> nike has values. let me say something. nike has values. they dropped lance armstrong right away. hey, you know why? because he cheated in sport. he also had a breakup with his wife but he cheated in sport. that's where nike draws the line. you cheat in sport you are done. you are done. and if you like the blade runner they dropped him. accused of killing somebody. >> okay to have 13 mistresses. okay to have tons of mistresses. that's really great. >> we're not the moral police. companies are not the moral police. >> laura: we very a nanny state. let's put that aside. the nanny state is quite a separate. has nothing to do with nike. tiger woods is playing amazing golf and he seems to have turned around his life. i hope he has. i think that would be a good thing.

ladies, good to see both of you. on deck, the nbc late night show feud continues. we will bring you the . úúúúúúúúúúúúúúúúúúúúúúúú ♪the more i search0forú my significance,♪ ♪seems0r ♪and0i0ú a0difference♪ ♪in anyú i've been0here♪ ♪and0i0u

>> and finally tonight, as we've been reporting. nbc is dealing with more turmoil over the tonight show. reports are that jay leno will be replaced by jimmy fallon by the fall of 2014 and the mood at the network seems tense to say the least. >> listen to this, monday night the prime time shows, the "the voice" and "the revolution" rather, moved nbc into the number two position. you know what that means? number two, between easter and passover, this is truly the season of miracles. we're number two. we're number two, amazing. let me tell you something, that's -- and i've been saying that for the last week that nbc is a big number two, haven't i been saying that? yes, congratulations. speaking of t-mobile they announced yesterday they're

doing away with contracts. so, apparently they got the idea from nbc. >> a new survey found the average american stays at their job for about four and a half years. unless they're a late night host on nbc. and that's what they-- >> and that's it for us tonight. thanks for watching. i'm laura ingraham in for bill o'reilly. don't forget to check out my radio show go to laura ingraham.com and be laura 365. and remember, the spin stops right here because we're always looking out for you. ♪ ♪