Democratic Homophobes

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Quote:

"Although I am opposed to gay marriage, I have also long believed that states have the right to adopt for themselves laws that allow same-sex unions," said Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, in his statement responding to the ruling.



"While I continue to oppose gay marriage, I believe today's decision calls on the Massachusetts state legislature to take action to ensure equal protection for gay couples," said Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts in his response.



"I do not support gay marriage, but I hope the Massachusetts state legislature will act in a manner that is consistent with today's Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling," said Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri, whose daughter is a lesbian.



Indeed, of the nine candidates running for the Democratic nomination, six say they do not support gay marriage -- Lieberman, Kerry, Gephardt, retired Gen. Wesley Clark of Arkansas, Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina and the front-runner, former Gov. Howard Dean of Vermont.



Only three are on record supporting full marriage rights for same-sex couples -- Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, civil rights activist the Rev. Al Sharpton of New York and former Sen. Carole Moseley Braun of Illinois. All three are considered long shots for the nomination.



Nuance



Just so we are clear here, 6 out of the 9 Democratic candidates are on record as not supporting homosexual marriage. The support the seperate but equal civil unions. Likewise Clinton was the instigator of "Don't ask, Don't tell" with the military. How can anyone honestly continue to claim that Democrats are advancing homosexual rights when it is clear they just give lip service to their causes. I say this because the position of the 6 out of 9 candidates happens to be my own position on the matter.



Does supporting civil unions instead of homosexual marriage constitute a reasonable progressive view. Is support of homosexual marriage a fringe position considering the view of the majority of Democratic presidential candidates? What is your view?



Nick
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 21
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    But if we allow gays to marry, what's to stop people from marrying arthropods, pachyderms, and all sorts of invertebrates?
  • Reply 2 of 21
    Democrat candidates know how people feel on this issue. And the overwhelming majority (I think I saw 80% or so in a Washington Post article, but I don't know for sure) of American people do not support gay marriage. They may be willing to support civil unions, but not marriage. The pro-gay marriage crowd is too small for any candidate to take up their cause. It may not be overly progressive, but the fact that they are willing to let states decide for themselves (or allow civil unions) is a step up from not allowing any type of recognition for gay couples under any circumstance.
  • Reply 3 of 21
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    First of all, 'homophobes' is the wrong word to describe these candidates. They don't hate gay people, in fact, they support civil unions. There is a *big* difference between wanting to further gay rights (albeit not as far as they could go) and trying to squash them entirely. You might want to consider changing your topic's title to reflect this.



    Second of all, I think that two adults should be able to be married if they love each other. That's my opinion on it. It does not hurt me in any way if two men or two women get married. Do people think that two people of the same gender getting married somehow lessens their own marriage or their love for their spouse? Over half of 'normal' marriages end in divorce, so I don't get the uproar over preventing people from getting married based on any type of biblical or religious references, and I also believe that God would want people to be happy.



    My feeling is that gay people are like the rest of us. They do their jobs, go to school, raise a family, etc. I don't understand the fear that people have, then, for letting them get a marriage license.
  • Reply 4 of 21
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,455member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BRussell

    But if we allow gays to marry, what's to stop people from marrying arthropods, pachyderms, and all sorts of invertebrates?



    Mmmmmmmmmmmmm.......inverebrates......





    Oh... I mean... BRussell, leave your own love life out of this discussion.





    Nick
  • Reply 5 of 21
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by tonton

    I agree with Trumptman here. I'm pissed off at all of these candidates for wording it this way. They're all weak. They need to educate about the mistaken thinking of Christian influenced America rather than adapt to it.



    Is that Lieberman's problem too?
  • Reply 6 of 21
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman

    Nuance



    Just so we are clear here, 6 out of the 9 Democratic candidates are on record as not supporting homosexual marriage. They support the seperate but equal civil unions.



    Nick




    This is also my opinion. For me the marriage imply the union of a man and a woman. The marriage is the first step for building a family. Building a family is not mandatory for married people, but it belong to the same spirit.



    I can truly understand that two gays people wants to officialise their unions : the civil unions are perfect for that. it's an official recocnition from the state. And it's important that the existence of gay are recocnized officialy.
  • Reply 7 of 21
    rokrok Posts: 3,519member
    yep, none of them feel they can support the unpopular stance of gay marriage without clouding it in double-speak in order to win the election.



    and once again, al sharpton says somehing i agree with (the other was him being the only one with balls enough to say he uses a mac).
  • Reply 8 of 21
    There are benefits to being married. To deny those benefits to a couple who are willing to take on that responsibilty is wrong.



    A majority of americans support the right of gay people to enter into a civil union... with all the rights of married people...



    But when you ask them about Gay Marriage they oppose it...



    I'm not sure why the distinction makes a difference... other than maybe they feel marriage is somthing exclusively for straight people.



    So when you look at those attitudes... it's pretty obvious that the candidates have the same opinions as the general public.



    Also... you can bet that Republican's will use the "sanctity of marriage" issue against them next year.
  • Reply 9 of 21
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    Democrats suck. They always have. This is not news.
  • Reply 10 of 21
    Spoken like a true neanderthal.
  • Reply 11 of 21
    jimmacjimmac Posts: 11,898member
    Yes but how does Mr. Bush feel on the subject? If pressed I bet I know the answer.
  • Reply 12 of 21
    Oh he already came out with a statement before he left for the U.K.
  • Reply 13 of 21
    Quote:

    Originally posted by groverat

    Democrats suck. They always have. This is not news.



    i always thought it was "mean people suck". at least that's what it says on the sticker. most republicans are mean, do they suck as well, or are they just pricks?



  • Reply 14 of 21
    Someone clear this up for me please. Is there any real legal distinction between civil union and marriage, or is marriage purely a social/religious institution with civil unions granting all the same legal benefits? If so, then the government has no business even discussing who can and can't be married.



    Apart from the obvious financial and legal benefits, Marriage is just a social convention. A way for couples to label themselves so that others perceive them in a certain way. The actual love and commitment that we equate with marriage may or may not actually exist with or without the ceremony.



    We've been raised and indoctrined into a society that, more or less by general consensus, defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Perceptions are changing slowly, as they always do, and no law can alter that one way or another. But all they are is perceptions. I'm all for gay couples fighting for the right to have the same benefits as straight couples, but to fight merely for a word is ridiculous. The fight for social acceptance will be won in its own time. Opinions cannot be legislated or enforced, nor should they be.
  • Reply 15 of 21
    gilschgilsch Posts: 1,995member
    Wow, that nails it. They're homophobes.
  • Reply 16 of 21
    typical idiot democrats
  • Reply 17 of 21
    Quote:

    Originally posted by trumptman

    Nuance



    Just so we are clear here, 6 out of the 9 Democratic candidates are on record as not supporting homosexual marriage. The support the seperate but equal civil unions.




    As a gay man let me say: Good enough for me. And far better than what gay-haters like Bush and his ilk would prefer, which is forcing all gays back into the closet.



    Quote:

    How can anyone honestly continue to claim that Democrats are advancing homosexual rights when it is clear they just give lip service to their causes.



    Howard Dean signed the wonderful Civil Unions bill. How is that "lip service"?



    I don't care if it's called marriage, civil union or Bob. Give me equal rights, and I'll be happy.
  • Reply 18 of 21
    chu_bakkachu_bakka Posts: 1,793member
    I don't get why a gay marriage would threaten the sanctity of my straight marriage. What does it have to do with me at all?



    It's like me having a problem with someone else's divorce... how does that affect me?



    Ignoring that gay people fall in love and want to commit to each other seems like they accept the "traditional values" that republicans hold so dear.



    Inter-racial marriages used to be illegal too.



    Republicans should just come out and say what they mean... "we don't like gay people, they should be discriminated against, they aren't equal to straight people and don't deserve the same rights. It disgusts me when people of the same sex love each other."
  • Reply 19 of 21
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Baby steps. Gay marriage is somewhat new and as people get used to the idea of gay unions, marriage will be the next step. Wean the general populace off of their xenophobic tendencies.



    I'm glad at least some politicians support the full fledged marriage idea though. Support will only grow as people become more educated on the subject.
  • Reply 20 of 21
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bunge

    Baby steps. Gay marriage is somewhat new and as people get used to the idea of gay unions, marriage will be the next step. Wean the general populace off of their xenophobic tendencies.



    I'm glad at least some politicians support the full fledged marriage idea though. Support will only grow as people become more educated on the subject.




    ... and as grey-haired fundamentalists die.
Sign In or Register to comment.