Monday, August 08, 2005

It's time for gays to stand up, both parties are against us

My blog has moved!!! Please visit my new blog for all the newest news, events, opinions and more!!!
You will be automatically re-directed in three seconds. Click the link to go to the new blog now. Use the search function on the new blog to find any story you are looking for on here.

It is high time for LGBT people to stand up for their rights and demand that our representatives and political candidates either be known to fully support us or not. I say it is time for politicians to get off the fence and stop playing with the LGBT community. It is for this reason that I am helping to lead The 2008 March on Washington Piedmont/Triad Organizing Effort Take a look at a blogpost from AndrewSullivan.com about Senator Clinton. Even she does not fully support us:
Hillary Rodham Clinton has a reputation as a principled liberal - at least that's what her base and her enemies seem to think. In practice, of course, she has always been a Clinton - a waffler, prevaricator, straddler. So it's no surprise to hear her complete non-answer on the question of same-sex marriage. Here's a transcript of a June 18 interview with Senator Clinton on the Brian Lehrer WNYC show in New York City: Lehrer: The lead story in the New York Times today is about Canada's decision to fully legalize gay marriage. do you think the United States should do that? Clinton: Well, obviously in our system it is unlikely ever to be a national decision. It is a state-by-state decision because of the way our federal system operates, where states define what the conditions for marriage, or domestic partnership, or civil union might be, so I don't think that we will ever face it. In fact there is a law on the books, passed before I was in the congress, the Defense of Marriage Act, which goes so far as to say that even if one state does it, other states under our full faith and credit clause of the constitution don't have to recognize it. Lehrer: But is Canada setting a good example, on that you'd like to see spread through the states here? Clinton: Well, I have long advocated domestic partnership laws and civil unions, to me... Lehrer: That's different from marriage. Clinton: Well, marriage means something different. you know, marriage has a meaning that I... I think should be kept as it historically has been, but I see no reason whatsoever why people in committed relationships can't have, you know, many of the same rights and the same, you know, respect for their unions that they are seeking and I would like to see that be more accepted than it is. Lehrer: But not with the context of marriage. Clinton: Yeah, I, I think that is, you know... First of all, I think that it is unlikely, if not impossible, to be something nationally accepted in our country, but I also think that we can realize the same results for may committed couples by urging that states and localities adopt civil union and domestic partnership laws. So there you have it. The Senator from New York State is opposed to equal rights for gays and lesbians. And that's one thing both the right and left will be reluctant to broadcast.

2 Comments:

But clearly you can see the difference between, say, Sen. Clinton and Sen. Santorum? I've left the Democratic Party to go to the Green Party, so I understand what you're saying, but I think it also has to be acknowledged that one party is much more against gay people than the other party. At least Sen. Clinton thinks our partnerships deserve some equal rights. It's not a perfect position, but one has to recognize the difference between her position and that of Sen. Santorum, for instance.
posted by Blogger Nate at 8/09/2005 08:53:00 PM  
Although one may be better than the other...the fact remains that our politicians and representatives continue to sit on the fence, using our community as a vote-getter and attention getter. My message to politicians: "Get off the fence and choose a side... either support us fully or not."