Source:
Weigel: Talk about your gay marriage position, because in 2008 you say you would be open to the idea of voting for gay marriage recognition. In 2009, you opposed it, and then last year you said you wouldn’t mind presiding over some gay weddings. Did your thinking evolve on that, or what was behind the vote against and the activism in 2009?
Barry: First of all, gay marriage is not the only litmus test. When you look at Marion Barry’s record, I started the first movement to hire a gay person in my administration, Richard Maulsby, was in my cabinet. I just went to an affair last week, we celebrated the situation. I was one of the original pushers of gay pride. I had gay people and lesbian people in my administration. And so my record was clear. What I decided to do was to dissent. I dissented because my constituents, a whole bunch of them, were opposed to it. I supported … domestic partnership over their objections. I supported a whole bunch of gay rights over their objections. And this is one that they feel very strongly about, the black preachers and my black constituents. Unlike other council members, where you had more of a variety of people supporting it, I decided not to. That didn’t change my personal view. My personal view is very simple: What happens in your bedroom, it’s up to you. If you want to use gay marriage as an affectionate kind of thing you’re doing, do it. But in terms of that law, I decided to dissent. I’ve always been a strong supporter of gay and lesbian rights, of LGBT rights. And so the gay community, the lesbian community, the LGBT community, understood it. They didn’t like it. But that’s democracy.
As with so many other things about the man, it seems that there was no simple answer.
= new reply since forum marked as read
