If gays are so bad for our party

[dsc]

and evidently we are such lowly members of society that standing up for us having the same fundamental right to marry that the Menendez brothers exercised in prision would cause us to lose, then why do you want our support? If we are that tainted then wouldn't you rather us stay home?

Dean is willing to be our friend even at the table of our enemies. I put up with two faced people in high school. Why should I now? If I am not good enough for you to acknowledge me in Geauga County then don't come calling at Voinovich park (during Pride).

[private_ryan]

1. don't

stay at home and see how a second term of Bush will advance your cause.

[ulysses]

4. boy, that'll certainly work.

You're in charge of the local GOTV effort, aren't you?

:eyes:

[w13rd0]

5. I make this pledge today...

...I will not vote for Bush. I will not punch my chad next to the Bush name. Anybody but Bush doesn't say Any Democrat but Bush...because Bush is a Republican. That would be stupid. Anybody but Bush means anybody but Bush. That might be nobody. That might be the libertarian candidate, or reform party, or green party. Might even be the democratic party. But the eventual nominee will have to earn my vote. So far, "It's my turn" and "I'm the most electable because I say so" are not reasons enough to earn my vote.

[Straight Shooter]

2. I've never understood the bigotry against gays

It's weird, if you think about it. Isn't this some sort of Old Testament yapping, Leveticus? I don't know my Bible very well. Seems to me with Jesus running around with 12 single guys, considering the odds, one of them had to be gay, or certainly so inclined. Paul maybe, would be my guess.

I think the Democratic party tends to be a bit timid. What a shame. Dean has brought us a long way (the Dems), and now some of the candidates are getting spineless about issues again. But I guess the lack of a sturdy spine allows one to straddle a fence more easily.

Don't give up.

[dsc]

6. It is getting tougher

I see the mainstream candidate who goes the furthest in supporting gay rights in my lifetime taken down like Dean has been and I can't help but be angry. Then I see the posts like I have seen in the last days on gay issues and know I can't even respond fully due to fear of being banned. My responses in one thread yesterday gave me my 2nd and third warnings. It is hard not to get depressed.

[janx]

16. I feel the same way as a het, dsc.

Please know that no matter what, there are many people who are on your side. We support Dean. :hug:

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

20. Deans position is the same as Kerrys!?!?!

What do you mean Dean is the candidate that has gone the furthest in supporting gay rights in your lifetime??? Kerry has been doing it consistently since the 80's.

And Dean DOES NOT support gay MARRIAGE. He supports CIVIL UNIONS, just like Kerry does.

The ONLY candidates that have come out for gay MARRIAGE are Kucinich and Sharpton.

[dsc]

24. Dean put his career on the line

Kerry didn't. Dean trumpets his stand Kerry doesn't. Yes, Kerry has taken great stands of the years but he never, and I mean never, mentions these to straight audiences. Gay rights don't grow on trees, it takes real leadership. Dean showed it and Kerry isn't. It is as simple as that.

[MidwestMomma]

60. It sucks to be sad, frustrated and angry

and unable to express your feelings.

It sucks that because our whole party platform has become ABB, that a lot of important issues like gay rights are being put on hold because the 'time is not right.'

I say this with a heavy heart because I have been a enthusiastic supporter of the Democratic party my whole life, but sometimes it seems that our party has become the party of panderers. That we are so afraid of losing that we will say anything to get a vote. That we're so afraid that we are going to offend some segment of society and lose a vote that we want to silence whole segments of our own party because we're afraid the Republicans will use this issue or that issue against us and we won't win.

Today it's gay rights, what will it be next? Maybe we'll decide it's time for the anti-war crowd to put down their signs until after the election because to a lot of Americans that's an unpopular issue also.

And before anyone asks, I'm still ABB. And yes, I understand how important it is that we get Bush out of office. I'm just not ready to accept that we only have one choice as our party candidate and I'm not ready to accept that we have to sacrifice all of party principle to beat Bush.

And DSC, just so you know, I'm currently warning free so if someone is being especially hurtful, let me know and I'll respond for you! }(

[Duncan Grant]

3. Agreed, words are powerful and the GOP will still come after us...

whether we use "civil union" or "gay-marriage" - they don't distinguish between the two choices. Why should we?

I pack a lot of personal emotion into this issue so I'll make an effort to remain open to 'reason' but it's getting harder and harder for me to continue to compromise on this issue.

I want a champion! I want someone who can expose the hypocrisy of the right-wing zealots. I have to hand it to Dean; he's not been afraid to take the arguement back to the Christian right. Dean's denounced them for over a year now.

[styersc]

34. You don't want a champion, you want an ant who can move a rubber tree

plant.

I do not understand the difference between marriage and union in a practical sense. I support equal protection and do not know how anyone can opposed this premise with a straight face (no pun).

I agree that the GOP will come gunning either way- we know they are the enemy on this issue and will not budge. If refering to the "event" as union rather then marriage helps to persuade fence sitters and moderates to our side I say that is how we should approach the issue.

Everyday that there is no legal recognition of the relationship a partner loses anothers' Social Security, inheritance, property, right to visit in hospital and make medical decisions, etc., etc., etc.

Is it right to let this outrage continue unchecked over semantics? Let's stop the bleeding and then find the cure.

[Duncan Grant]

47. That is a strategic approach but why not support the MA Supreme Court?

Doesn't this leave Kerry vulnerable to some perverse argument about 'judicial advocacy' from the bench?

We could probably use a dual treatment to stop the bleeding by taking away the right's knives. Why not confront the people who are inflicting the harm? This sort of injury diminishes us all.

[styersc]

61. I just know that in order to win a fight-

it is as important to pick when and where as it is to pick "about what". Let's get this election in the bag (Kerry- or whoever) and then we will duke it out.

The battle is not as important is as is the victory necessary.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

7. Kerry has been supporting gay rights before it was fashionable

He authored one of the first anti-discrimination bills against gays in the workplace in the nation and was in the forefront on AIDS funding back when our fellow bretheren were droppingg like flies in the 80's.

It would be nice if you had a legislative memory beyond a couple years.

[dsc]

8. How dare you?

How frigging dare you? I have time and again said that I know his record. Before you have the unmittigated audacity to tell me what I do and don't know why don't you try looking at what I have posted.

[Nicholas_J]

30. Dean stated he would not support

That Gay Civil Rights bill that Kerry authored long before Dean ever tought of gay civil rights:

Not that there is much evidence that he ever did think about gay civil rights in any way that would matter. Dean gave the old standard lines about civil rights for gays, but while decisions were being made, Dean refused to state where he stood on the issue.

Only now when it gives him some degree of political advantage, does he speak like he has had a lifetime of fighting the good fight for gay rights. While other Vermont Democrats like Doug Racine were putting their careers on the line , by stating that he supported the right for gays to marry, the Baker v State case was befroe the courts, Dean skirted the issue by stating that he didnt want to discuss the matter while it was before the courts. Hardly courage:

Candidates respond to OITM survey

In early September, OITM sent out questionnaires to candidates for statewide office in Vermont on issues of particular concern to lesbians and gay men. These candidates were informed that the results would be published in our newspaper and that failure to respond would also be noted. What follows are the results of this survey.

Lieutenant Governor: Howard Dean would not support a civil rights bill "aimed specifically at any given group" but he would include lesbian/gay civil rights protection in a broader bill. He did support the HTLV-III anti-discrimination bill sponsored by Micque Glitmen last year. He would support state funding for education and services to people with AIDS and people in high-risk groups. He would support re-instituting the State Human Rights Commission. He was ambivalent about appointing a liaison simply because he wasn't sure if it was necessary because of numerous "friends and supporters" in the gay community.

And on the day that legislations was sent to the Vermont Judiaciary Comittee recommending gay marriage:

Marriage Issue Takes Center Stage at the Statehouse

Opening Day Demonstration

Early assumptions following the Court’s December 20 decision were that domestic partnership is the only real plan of action. Governor Howard Dean has said on several occasions that he would support domestic partnership legislation, but is uncomfortable with the idea of actual gay marriage. Dean has recently clarified his position, declaring in a radio interview, “I’m against gay marriage.”

“Dean is out of touch with folks. I’m pretty sure that separate but equal isn’t going to fly,” said Judy Sargent of Marshfield, VT. “We should save ourselves a lot of trouble and time and just make it marriage.”

http://www.mountainpridemedia.org/feb2000/news_centerstage.htm

Dnea has actually never done anything of his own volition, or ever led in any way, shape or form, any movement to secure gay rights.

He has only supported gay rigts when it conferred some sort of poliical advantage, or when he was flat out given no choice.


Remember, Dean was given two choices by the Vermont Supreme Court.
Either gay marriage or civil unions. The majority of the Vermont Democratic and Progressive Parties sent a piece of legislation to the Vermont Judicuary comittee a piece of legilation that recommended gay marriage. Deans opposition to this was a facto in killing that legislation and reverting to the less politically dangerous "civil union concept".

And this is considered being friendly to the gay community?

[dsc]

63. People who post crap like this

I see maore pathetic arguments here, and as much bigotry out of supposed liberal than I do on Free Republic. And as much ignorance.

The Catholic Church has no more power to control actions and behaviors of its priests and bishops,nuns or laiety at the local level than the the U.S. Congress does from having cops who shake down tourists at speed traps or cops from stopping those pretty little ladies who are speeding and then suggest sexual favor,or flap out raping them. Bishops move pedophiles phile priests around, but cops rape women, and beat prisoners to death at a far higher rate that priest behave as pedophiles and YOU are paying for that. Does not matter. I live in a city where the BAPTISTS RUN EVEARYTHING. A LARGE CITY. The local government can urines test on demand and if you were DRINKING the night before and it shows up you can be fired becasue drinking can effect your work behavior hourse, even days after you drink. One of their highest members was just also caught for diddling little boys and they local church organization =was covering this up for 30 years. Same thing just happened here with the MORMON church. A youth leader forcing his young charges into sex was recently uncomevered and the churche knew about and covered it for years..

The Catholic Church has no more LOCAL authority, than the Mormon Temple in Utah, or the Southern Baptist Convention. As a matter of fact, the rates of pediphilia in the Catholic Churches are no higher than in the general population. But anti-catholic bigotry makes it more a front page issue. The Catholic Church has no police force, or any other such brutal S.S. like organization to support it or enforce obedience, They got rid of the enforcement arm of the Inquisiion Centuries ago. Sorry, this is just left wing version of catholic basshing, I can go to the Free Republic to see it done more skillfully if I want to.

All coverups are local coverups, outside of the authority of the Church Leadership or regulations. The rate of such sexual crimes within the church is probably more publically dealt with than the exposure of it outside of the Church.

Would you have them go bavk to medieval methods, Seaching to contraception and burning those caught at the stake. By the way burning of witches at the stake or those posessed by demons(which is how pedophilia was described before the 18th century) was far more often done by protestants than Catholics. For th most part, the church has tried to deal with these human problems humanely. They have tried to deal with the issue of GAY pedophelia(as most of those accused have been gay) in as humane a fashion as possible. trying to get the sick priest away from a situation in which he would engage in pedophilia again...

ANd you forget about the guy in California who accused priest of pedophilia,and was caught scamming them, and lost the case. Or the Mc Martin family, wrongfully accused of pedophilia, and exonerated years later, leves ruined

We have yet to determine if and how many of those priestsaccused of pedophilia, may simply be accused , and as innocent as trhe McMartins were.

Considering the nature of anti-catholic bigotry in the U.S., so strong that it occurs rampantly on a supposed progressive site, as well as the nature of the U.S. legal system , which has been found to have condemned hundreds of innocent people to death in the last decade. I would tread carefully before opening ones big mouth about the Catholic Church. If you are a Catholic Priest or the Catholic Church in the U.S. your constitutionaly rights are revered on DU...you are guilty before proven innocent.

I find that among Catholic bashers, ex Catholics are the most ignorant about the organizational structure of the church.

Rules are made at the top, but as in any organization, the rules can be ignored at the lower levels


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=107867#108746

don't get to lecture about gay rights. Not on a plantet called earth.

[goobergunch]

9. What bill is this?

Public Law Number, please?

Or, if it didn't pass, Number and Congress, please?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

25. Here;s his record from Human Rights Campaign

http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section=Presidential_Candidates&CONTENTID=12883&TEMPLATE=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm

[Nicholas_J]

37. Civil Rights Amendments Act of 1985

The Senate Version that Kerry presented was legislation that dealt only with gay civil rights.

...One of the original cosponsors of legislation banning discrimination based on sexual orientation...

http://www.advocate.com/html/stories/898/898_kerry.asp


Ending Discrimination: One of John Kerry’s first acts as a U.S. Senator was to introduce a bill prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. He supports passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and has adopted a nondiscrimination policy for his Congressional offices based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

http://www.johnkerry.com/communities/glbt/glbt2.html#a2

Kerry says his record over the years on a range of issues sets him apart from other candidates. In 1985, he authored the Senate version of the gay civil rights bill — a measure that, if passed, would have covered discrimination in employment, housing and credit. His average score on the Human Rights Campaign's congressional scorecard, begun in the 101st Congress, is 96 percent — with a perfect score for the last four congresses.

http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section=Presidential_Candidates&CONTENTID=12883&TEMPLATE=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm


This is the legislation that Howard Dean stated he opposed in 1986 as Lt Governor.

[dawgman]

22. Kerry has come out AGAINST the MA supreme court decision.

Fuck him.

[David Dunham]

53. he'd lose 48 states if he supported mass. decision

[mikehiggins]

54. Right. He's doing the politically expedient thing. Again. n/t

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

10. Gays are NOT bad for the Democratic party

If this is about the thread about the Kerry quote. that quote was taken completely out of context. Kerry's position is NO DIFFERENT than Clark, Edwards, or Dean. All of the major candidates are for CIVIL UNIONS as opposed to "marriage".

What difference does it make what it's called, as long as it's still EQUAL RIGHTS??

I copied this from what I posted in that other thread. These are Kerry's positions re GLBT, amny of which go back to the mid 80's

Kerry has always supported equal rights for GLBT and has sponsored hate crimes legislation as well. Here are a few excerpts on his positions:


Preventing Hate Crimes
John Kerry is an original cosponsor of the Hate Crimes Prevention bill, which would extend federal jurisdiction over serious, violent hate crimes. These would include crimes motivated by sexual orientation. Hate crimes rose a disturbing 3.5% from 1999 to 2000.

Protecting Gay and Lesbian Families
John Kerry believes that same-sex couples should be granted rights, including access to pensions, health insurance, family medical leave, bereavement leave, hospital visitation, survivor benefits, and other basic legal protections that all families and children need. He has supported legislation to provide domestic partners of federal employees the benefits available to spouses of federal employees. He was one of 14 Senators -- and the only one up for reelection in 1996 -- to oppose the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Lifting the Ban on Gays in the Military
John Kerry opposed the Clinton Administration’s “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Policy” He was one of a few senators to testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee and call on the President to rescind the ban on gay and lesbian service members.

Support for Civil Unions
John Kerry supports same-sex civil unions so that gay couples can benefit from the the health benefits, inheritance rights, or Social Security survivor benefits guaranteed for heterosexual couples.

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/glbt/

[dsc]

13. It is about

the marriage plank. It is about the marriage isn't an important issue stuff. And it is about a candidate with that record who refuses to tell voters he has it. If he won't trumpet that record in Democratic primaries then why should I think he will fight to advance it any other place?

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

32. I think you are creating an issue that doesn't exist

No candidate has a more exemplary record and history than Kerry does when it comes to equal rights for gays. If you don't see that it's because you are refusing to acknowledge it.

And Kerry's stand on civil unions vs marriage is NO DIFFERENT than Dean's. Go read Dean's statement again, he did NOT come out saying he was changing his position FOR gay marriage.

Are you at all concerned about whether DEAN is going to come out and trumpet gay marriage now and CHANGE his position on this issue? Is HE going to fight that cause for you?

I think you are just looking for reasons to bash Kerry, if you want to know the truth.

[dsc]

35. It is an issue to me

when you pretend you don't know me in place A and then ask for my vote in place B. Kerry treats gays like the crazy uncle to be put in the attic. Just why should I trust him to fight for us in the WH if he hides his support of me in the primaries.

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

41. He does no such thing

Kerry has been supporting gay rights since at least the mid 80's.

You have your mind made up that Kerry is the anti+Christ no matter what he says or does, and will refuse to acknowledge the fact that he has done MORE for gays than Dean has, and their positions are exactly the same.

So this is really a waste of time.

[dsc]

48. Show me the law this man has passed

Dean has helped pass and signed laws that banned hate crimes, anti gay workplace discrimination, and provided civil unions. Kerry none. Is that all Kerry's fault, of course not. But it is Kerry's fault that he never, and I have listed to his stump speech on many more than one occasion, every mentions gays at all in it. Dean always does. That matters.

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

55. Have you even read the rest of this thread you started?

I posted some of this elsewhere in the thread

A Record of Working on Behalf of Gay and Lesbian Americans

With a 100% rating from the Human Rights Campaign since 1995, John Kerry is a powerful voice in the ongoing fight for civil rights for gay and lesbian Americans.

Ending Discrimination
One of John Kerry’s first acts as a U.S. Senator, in 1985, was to introduce a bill prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. He supports passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and has adopted a nondiscrimination policy for his Congressional offices based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

HIV/AIDS Funding
John Kerry cosponsored the first Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency Act (CARE) - which represents the largest discretionary federal investment in treating individuals with HIV and AIDS. Kerry also sponsored the Vaccines for the New Millennium Act, aimed at boosting contributions to the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, a non-profit group working to promote development of an HIV vaccine in 2000. Kerry introduced the U.S. Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria Act, which would increase the U.S. government’s funding of international HIV/AIDS efforts from approximately $1.7 billion in 2003 to $1.9 billion in 2004. This effort led to the unanimous passage in May 2003 the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria Act of 2003. AIDS activists characterized Kerry as one of Congress’s top leaders on HIV/AIDS policy.

Preventing Hate Crimes
John Kerry is an original cosponsor of the Hate Crimes Prevention bill, which would extend federal jurisdiction over serious, violent hate crimes. These would include crimes motivated by sexual orientation. Hate crimes rose a disturbing 3.5% from 1999 to 2000.

Protecting Gay and Lesbian Families
John Kerry believes that same-sex couples should be granted rights, including access to pensions, health insurance, family medical leave, bereavement leave, hospital visitation, survivor benefits, and other basic legal protections that all families and children need. He has supported legislation to provide domestic partners of federal employees the benefits available to spouses of federal employees. He was one of 14 Senators -- and the only one up for reelection in 1996 -- to oppose the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Lifting the Ban on Gays in the Military
John Kerry opposed the Clinton Administration’s “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Policy” He was one of a few senators to testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee and call on the President to rescind the ban on gay and lesbian service members.

Support for Civil Unions
John Kerry supports same-sex civil unions so that gay couples can benefit from the the health benefits, inheritance rights, or Social Security survivor benefits guaranteed for heterosexual couples.


http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/glbt/


Dean, on the other hand:

snip from 12/20/2000

"Early assumptions following the Court’s December 20 decision were that domestic partnership is the only real plan of action. Governor Howard Dean has said on several occasions that he would support domestic partnership legislation, but is uncomfortable with the idea of actual gay marriage. Dean has recently clarified his position, declaring in a radio interview, “I’m against gay marriage.” "




http://www.mountainpridemedia.org/feb2000/news_centerstage.htm

[dsc]

58. Of that list, one and only one, thing became law

none of the rest. And in the very same news conference as your Dean quote was his absolute support of civil unions. Of course your computer editted that out, I am sure.

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

66. And here is Kerry's UNEDITED statement today

"Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, said in his own statement: "I believe and have fought for the principle that we should protect the fundamental rights of gay and lesbian couples — from inheritance to health benefits. I believe the right answer is civil unions. I oppose gay marriage and disagree with the Massachusetts Court's decision.

What's the difference? Kerry's support for civil unions is absolute as well, and he didn't wait until it was politically advantageous to take a stand like Dean did

Again, I think you are creating an issue that does not exist. Kerry CLEARLY has a long history and exemplary record of standing FOR, and working FOR, equal rights AND protections for gays.

Your pre-existing bias is GLARING.

This whole exercise is nothing but sour grapes because Dean did not breeze through the primaries like you and his supporters expected him to, and your ire is targeted at Kerry for no other reason than because he is the front runner, and the "perceived" usurper of Dean's throne.

This is childish.

[dsc]

67. The first time I posted about this was in June of 2003

when Lieberman was the front runner in national polls and Kerry was the frontrunner in New Hampshire. It isn't what he said today. It is what he has done his whole campaign. He never brings us up. We barely make the cut of his campaign literature. For me this is a real problem and I don't apologize for having it.

[janx]

42. Dean's preference is that the decision belongs to the states--

that is, if they want to "go there."

Civil unions are a given for Dean. He risked his political career and his life defending them. He's open to leaving the marriage quotient up to individual states. Massachusetts did just that.

Kerry, on the other hand, just can't stand to lose any votes, especially with this religious right wing federal marriage amendment looming right now. And it's his own state!

The whole thing is laughably transparent, and it's vintage Kerry.

[HFishbine]

28. This is disturbing

"John Kerry believes that same-sex couples should be granted rights..."

Granted? How about recognition that the Constitution has already "granted" them and that it's the obligation of anybody who takes an oath to uphold the Constitution to defend those rights, not "grant" them like some benevolent lord.

It's also disturbing that Kerry finds it necessary to enumerate the rights he thinks should be granted. The implication is that there must be some that will still be off limits.

Dean doesn't dance around the issue: "I believe firmly that we must do everything in our power to assure that all citizens of the United States are afforded equal rights under the law."

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

36. Oh for pity sakes.

Right now gays don't have those rights. Kerry believes gays should have equal rights.

You are playing word games. He is not implying that there must be some rights that should be off limits. You are making that shit up.

Dean's and Kerry's positions are exactly the same - for civil unions. The only difference is that Kerry was fighting for gay rights long before Dean ever came into the picture, and Dean didn't take a position as Governor until it was politically opportunistic for him to do so.

[janx]

62. No! This isn't a semantics game.

This is the United States Constitution.

Either i'tis or i'taint.

What do you suppose would have happened if we had said, after the women's suffrage movement: "OK, we'll grant voting rights to these women" instead of saying "These women have these rights under our constitution" ?

What would have happened if we had said "We'll go ahead and grant the right of freedom to the negroes" (I use the term popular then) instead of "Negroes have the right of freedom under our constitution" ?

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

[YouMustBeKiddingMe]

69. Here's Dean's position

From his website:


snip

As governor of Vermont, I have demonstrated my leadership in this area by signing the first law in the country granting same-gender couples the right to enter into civil unions. This law guarantees lesbian and gay couples the same basic legal rights that married couples enjoy: the right to inherit property, obtain child custody, visit a partner in the hospital, and control a partner’s affairs upon death. I have shown that I am not afraid to represent all Americans as full citizens of the Union. And, as President, I will be deeply committed to ensuring our democracy represents and protects the rights of everyone who contributes to our nation’s success.

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/cg/index.html?type=page&pagename=policy_statement_lgbt

Civil Unions Bill - Governor Dean signed Vermont’s civil unions legislation into law on April 26, 2000. Vermont is the first state to enact legislation recognizing same-sex unions, and granting gay and lesbian couples the same legal rights as heterosexual couples.


http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/cg/index.html?type=page&pagename=policy_record_civilrights_equalrightsforall

So are you JUST as disturbed with Dean now?? Or was this really just nit picking over semantics because it was Kerry?

What's your position now?

[sandnsea]

11. Civil unions

We're standing up for you. Sorry it doesn't meet your standards of acceptable legal rights.

[goobergunch]

12. Separate but equal

I agree with the Massachusetts Supreme Court.

[sandnsea]

19. Well goody

We could have a debate about equal rights for gays. Instead we're going to have one about religion. Yippee! What a great day for America!! Being sent even further back into the dark ages. And I'm supposed to be happy about that?

[Duncan Grant]

17. What's that supposed to mean? Can you clarify please? -nt-

[sandnsea]

23. See post #19

Civil unions was a perfectly acceptable alternative to a Constitutional Amendment last week. Now it's not. There aren't any rights that would be denied by having a civil union instead of a marriage.

[dsc]

27. actually that depends

Unless and until, Kerry defines what he means by that statement and what federal actions he would take we know no such thing.

[sandnsea]

43. You know better

It's beneath you to insinuate otherwise.

[dsc]

59. No I don't

He has not, to my knowledge, gone on record for any federal law in that regard. If he has please site it.

[Nicholas_J]

46. Yes there are

CIvil Unions actually only effect rights available at the state level and have zero effect on conferring rights that are given to heterosexuals that are not available to gays. For example, a gay person cannot name as beneficiary, their partner, for any benefits confered by Social Security, or by Federal Employment. As a matter of fact cilvil unions only conferred about 300 of the several thouusand that are available otherwise.

Unfortualtely, Deans statements are rather politically opportunistic, as his own record of opposition to gay marriage is such that he was largely responsible for killing the gay marriage legislation that was sent to the Vermont Judicaary comittee for passage, which resulted in civil unions. The act originally sent for consideration was not a civil unions act, but a gay marraige law, which through a coalition of liberal demcrats and Vermont Progressive party legislators, pssed through the initial legislative sessions, even though opposed by Dean. When it went before the Juciciary Comittee, Dean publically cited his opposition to gay marriage, and then conservatives took advantage of Deans support to weaken the legislation.

[IndianaGreen]

26. It means that gays are supposed to be grateful they are allowed on the bus

It's now time to take the ABB loyalty oath...

A... B... B...

You can see...

Biden-Lugar...

It's the thing...

A... B... B...


:puke:

[janx]

29. That's not the point!

That's not dsc's point at all, if I am reading dsc correctly.

Kerry is once again taking the "safe" route in hopes of gaining votes--to the detriment of our national GLBT population. It's as if he has to be on both sides of every argument to garner votes. Can't he take a firm and principled stand on anything and stick to it?

If he can't, how are we to get anywhere? And how will we ever win the general election if he's the nominee?

[dsc]

31. thank you

that is to a large extent my point. I am just not a very good writer.

[sandnsea]

44. civil unions

not gay marriage. That's his position. Has been. Will be.

[janx]

56. Will he back a constitutional amendment admitting such?

Just curious.

Does he believe this should be a matter for the federal government and our constitution?

[lastknowngood]

14. At least Dean was a Conservative who has been portrayed as

a liberal and he has been consistent and clear. Remember this is a ploy by the fascist to divide the party, inside and outside of the democratic party. Vote your conscience but remember bush is an all encompassing evil if it gets close, which I don't believe it will be if Kerry is the nominee please help save my country. Until we completely destroy the BFEE and every repugnant bastard we will never be safe any of us. I say this as a straight middle aged white male who has always voted Dem. I will be changing to independent after this election.

[HFishbine]

33. "a ploy by the fascist to divide the party"

So, where's the unity? If some in the democratic party say, "Not now," or "This is the best we can do," isn't the ploy working?

[revcarol]

15. Please consider Kucinich.

He sees gay marriage as a matter of EQUAL RIGHTS.

Allow him to be the point man by sending him a few $$ every once in a while. He's honest and doesn't waffle, so you won't see him "clarifying" his stance in a few days!!

[dsc]

18. He supported DOMA back in 1996

sorry but he is hardly a beacon of consistency on this issue.

[HFishbine]

21. Haven't you heard?

We can't win without the middle.


Let's see how we do without the left.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tobius]

49. Sounds like

freeperland. The nominee needs to take a stand for equality, whether it's divisive or not. Fight for what is right- ( I seem to remember that slavery was a bit divisive).

[MidwestMomma]

64. Some people might say that people that have a problem with gays

shouldn't be allowed to vote at all! :evilgrin:

[Terwilliger]

38. Nader may not have been into "gonadal" politics...

but he did'nt disrespect gays like Democrats do by their very politicing.

[cindyw]

40. Explain to me how Kerry and Dean differ on gay marriage.

Why do have quotes on your comment? Who are you quoting?

[janx]

45. See my post #42.

.

[Turkw]

50. Do you want to be right, or do you want to win? it may come down to this

You are right, it is stupid and ignorant to deny you the rights we heterosexuals have. I will not deny this, I don't like it. I'm sure you hate it. But I don't think an all or nothing strategy is your best option. That being said, what level of progress can you live with?

If a Democrat wins, I believe that there will be gains, not the end of the battle, but real, substantial gains for your rights being recognized. Here is Clark's position:

# Ban discrimination based on sexual orientation. We should make sure that the Civil Rights Act bans discrimination based on race, religion, sex, national origin, and sexual orientation.

# Strengthen federal protections against hate crimes. No one in this country should be the target of violence because of their appearance, religion, or sexual orientation.

# Protect all families. Families in the United States come in many shapes and sizes. Currently, most of our laws extend rights and responsibilities only to heterosexual families and explicitly exclude same-sex couples from enjoying those same rights and responsibilities. It is in the best interest of our country to promote stable communities and families - this includes both heterosexual and same-sex families. Accordingly, I believe that same-sex couples should not be denied rights to pensions, health insurance, family medical leave, bereavement leave, hospital visitation, survivor benefits, and other basic legal protections that all families and children need.

# Give federal employees the right to name same-sex partners as beneficiaries. Major U.S. corporations have adopted human resources policies that allow employees to designate a domestic partner as a beneficiary of health and other employment benefits. The federal government should do the same.

# Ensure that everyone can serve. I believe that the military needs to rethink the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. It does not serve this country to discriminate against people who want to serve in our armed forces. I would ask the military to craft and implement a policy that ensures that everyone who wants to serve their country is permitted to do so with honor and dignity. I would ask the military to look seriously at the British policy, which prohibits sexual misconduct by both heterosexuals and homosexuals. I would then submit the new policy to Congress to replace the current "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law.

# Ensure access to affordable health care, including AIDS/HIV Services. My health care proposal ensures that all Americans would have access to affordable health insurance - and sets aside funding for public health programs to improve prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS.

[antipov1]

51. Take the safer route

I think that the democratic should take a safer stance behind one of the less publicized candidates, Wes Clark, he routinely states his belief in Gay union, for clarification check out his website, www.clark04.com

[Fleshdancer]

52. Well I can't speak for the entire party, but I'll fight for you.

I don't know why so many people have a problem with gay marriage. With all the bombing, all the terrorism and war, we still condemn people based on how they love just as much as we condemn people by how they hate.

I prefer to call it gay marriage because although marriage may have started as a religious institution, it isn't confined to that concept anymore. My marriage was at a wedding center with a judge...religion had nothing to do with it and yet it's still considered a marriage. Long ago the white dress meant something more than it does now. Long ago the father literally did give the daughter to the groom because she was considered property. Things change. Marriage has changed.

[mitchum]

57. Look, if the Democrats wanted to be all real politik about it...

they would crunch numbers:
actual numbers of gays who support the party VS actual number of voters who stay away from the party because they consider it "the gay party". If the latter number significantly outweighed the former, the party would throw them to the wolves. I don't think this is a good or right idea, and let's hope that party strategists on down the road also agree.

[tobius]

65. Number cruncher

is Kerry- but he has a better way, attract both sides.( sarcasm?)

[mdguss]

68. See March 2004 Atlantic Monthly:

Mine came today. It isn't on the internet yet, but there is an interesting article entitled "Marriage Counselor" by Franklin Foer on conservative strategy on the issue.

The conservatives are careful not to go too far (the constitutional amendment that--according to the Washington Post--Bush is going to back leaves wiggle room for civil unions. The article essentially says that starting a culture war a repeat of the 1992 Republican implosion. If Democrats start a culture war, the same thing will happen.

Judges are ultimately going to decide this unless a constitutional amendment is passed. Standing in firm support of gay marriage will only produce a constitutional amendment. Lying low now, and ceeding the ground to the Republicans, will even out power in the courts and give the long-term struggle more of a chance.

I'm sorry it's offensive, but standing firm on this issue will cause a electoral disaster, and probably end the movement towards gay rights. Gay marriage is a loaded issue and one that Democrats cannot win on. The ground that has been gained in the gay rights movement will be lost in 24 hours on November 2nd if this becomes an election about gay marriages.

[tobius]

70. Issue based voting

What bothers me most is that on alot of issues we all seem to agree on there seems to be a strategy of "finesse' because our goals "turn off" people. Tax cuts, Defense spending, etc.. the list goes on and on. I think the corporate media has done a good job on our own party.