McCain on Gay Marriage
by Augur • Feb 25th, 2008 at 5:00 pm •
John McCain’s website doesn’t list his position on gay marriage. In reviewing a story on his opposition to the Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage, the only thing perfectly clear is that he opposed the amendment. He mentions that he supported the Defense of Marriage Act, but also says that if the states aren’t able to effectively prohibit gay marriage, and if the federal government also fails, then a gay marriage amendment might be appropriate. I’m wondering how the Agora’s Rainbow Panthers feel about McCain’s half-hearted opposition to the gay marriage amendment, and also how our Pro-McCain posters feel about McCain’s position on preserving hetero-marriage.
Comment by Brian on 25 February 2008 at 3:34 pm:
It should also be noted that McCain campaigned in favor a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in Arizona (the only such amendment to fail a referendum, as far as I know), going so far as to appear in a television ad urging people to vote in favor of the amendment.
As for my opinion…I think that’s bad.
Comment by tet on 25 February 2008 at 6:05 pm:
It’s another instance of a Presidential candidate wanting the Federal government to regulate something that is, basically, no government’s business.
Bad, bad, bad.
Tom
Comment by Charlotte on 26 February 2008 at 9:21 am:
The GOP has to attack the LGBT community to show what real men they are. :) Marriage is a basic civil right that should be attainable by all Americans. For the truth about gay marriage check out our trailer. Produced to educate & defuse the controversy it has a way of opening closed minds & provides some sanity on the issue: http://www.OUTTAKEonline.com
Comment by Augur on 26 February 2008 at 9:41 am:
Charlotte: Thanks for stopping in to comment at Urbanagora. We’ll check out the trailer
Comment by Leland Traiman on 26 February 2008 at 12:25 pm:
Federal Civil Unions=Marriage Equality; State Same-sex Marriage Does Not.
There is a myth that marriage has more rights than civil unions. That myth is born from the fact that civil unions have only been passed by states which have no power to grant the 1138 federal benefits of marriage. However, a federal civil union policy would. Senators Clinton & Obama support a federal civil unions policy. 48 million votes cast in 29 states, 32 million against same sex marriage, we lost 2 to 1. According to Jennifer SookneMizell of Marriage Equality USA, “Actually, we get more benefits in California in certain areas with domestic partnerships than the same gendered marrieds in Massachusetts get.” The choice is clear, federal civil unions are achievable, federal same-sex marriage is not. Federal Civil Unions=Marriage Equality
Comment by augur on 26 February 2008 at 5:20 pm:
Great comment Leland:
I’ve been saying for a long time that the gay rights movement has been blowing it consistently arguing about “marriage” when they should be focusing on equal treatment under the law.
One point you made left me most curious, where does “1138 federal benefits of marriage” come from?
Have you seen a list or chart or any kind of study breaking that down?
I’ve had several discussions with Tet on this blog about how many of those rights could be handled through party to party contracting. This isn’t enough, in my opinion, because for married couples many of these rights are automatic, but for gay couples, even if the “rights” can be created through contracting, it isn’t equal treatment under the law for one class of couples to get rights by default where another gets them only by contracting. One need look no farther than the percent of americans who dont write up wills to see that contracting is a poor substitute for genuine equity, even assuming that the majority of the “1138 federal benefits of marriage” could be handled through contracting. And my guess is that this assumption would be flawed. Would you please, please send me support for this “1138 federal benefits of marriage”
inspired.augur@gmail.com
thanks
I might do a few more posts on this later