Sanders’ evolving and ‘wishy-washy’ stance on same-sex marriage

[RandySF]

But both of these news items appeared after the Vermont legislature approved the gay-marriage law in April 2009. We can find no evidence of “outspoken” support before the law was passed — a process that started in 2007 — either in news clips or his Senate office press statements maintained on the WayBack Machine.

Indeed, a noted Vermont political writer, the late Peter Freyne, wrote in 2000 that Sanders deserved the “Wishy-Washy Award hands down” for his “carefully crafted non-statement statement” on whether the Vermont legislature should craft a law that permitted civil unions for homosexuals.

“Obtaining Congressman Bernie Sanders’ position on the gay marriage issue was like pulling teeth…from a rhinoceros,” Freyne said after the Vermont Supreme Court urged the Vermont legislature to draft a law. “Sanders publicly tried walking the tightrope — applauding the court’s decision and the cause of equal rights without supporting civil marriage for same-sex couples.” Freyne accused Sanders of not wanting to offend “his conservative, rebel-loving rural following out in the hills.”

The Pinocchio Test

Sanders likes to portray himself as a no-nonsense truth teller. But he is also a politician who, for a variety of reasons, sometimes has trimmed his sails on certain controversial issues.

Sanders can certainly have bragging rights for having opposed DOMA when it was not a popular step. But his position on same-sex marriage was more nuanced and obscure, and he appears to have evolved on the issue until it was more politically feasible. We can find little evidence he was an “outspoken proponent” of or ahead of the crowd on either Vermont’s 2000 civil-union law or the 2009 gay-marriage law, though we would welcome more evidence concerning his contemporaneous statements and can adjust this rating if more emerges.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/11/03/sanders-evolving-and-wishy-washy-stance-on-same-sex-marriage/

[Bluenorthwest]

1. Hillary defended DOMA just last week. Bernie voted against it as did a good number of Democrats

who very clearly told the others what they were doing was wrong, mean, and that they would regret it in the future.

I was ok with Hillary until she dragged DOMA out and started in on the revisions and excuses. She spent 17 years opposing marriage equality decidedly and with constant mention of her 'faith'. I'm sick of that sort of thing and the people who find it acceptable to treat their neighbors so poorly.

She needs to apologize. As do all of the DOMAcrats. But they won't. What they do is craft excuses for their own actions, excuses that are shown false by a quick look at the Congressional record.

[PatrickforO]

2. OK, so Sanders and Clinton are now both for same sex marriage.

Sanders is a proponent of strengthening Social Security by removing the payroll tax cap. Where is your candidate on this issue?

Sanders is a proponent of a single payer healthcare system. Where is Clinton on single payer?

Sanders wants to impose a miniscule transaction tax on securities trades and plans to use this to finance free tuition for our children and grandchildren in state postsecondary institutions. Where does Clinton stand on that?

Sanders believes the greatest threat facing us is climate change and plans an aggressive series of moves designed to decrease dependence on carbon based fuels. What is your candidate's plan on climate change?

[Bluenorthwest]

3. What the courageous No voters said about DOMA to their Yes voting peers on the day:

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.): “I rise in strong opposition to this ill-named “Defense of Marriage Act” and I do so on the basis of conscience, Constitution and constituency.”

Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii): “I understand some of the people who are sponsoring this bill are on their second or third marriages. I wonder which one they are defending.”

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.): “Whether senators are for or against same-sex marriage, there are ample reasons to vote against this bill because it represents an unconstitutional exercise of congressional power.”

Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.): “I recognize that my views are likely to be in the minority as well as unpopular, but this isn’t the first time I’ve come to the well to stand up for what I believe in, and it won’t be the last.”

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.): “Let us not take part in this assault on lesbian and gay Americans and their families.”

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.): “Discrimination is discrimination, and it is wrong.”

Rep. Lynn Rivers (D-Mich.): “I rise in opposition to this bill and I oppose it with both my head and my heart.”

Sen. Charles Robb (D-Va.): “I feel very strongly that this legislation is fundamentally wrong, and feeling as I do it would not be true to my conscience or my oath of office if I fail to speak out against it.”

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif): “To me, this is ugly politics. To me, it is about dividing us instead of bringing us together. To me, it is about scapegoating. To me, it is a diversion from what we should be doing.”

Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.): “These couples are not hurting us with their actions, in fact they may be helping us by showing us that love can indeed conquer prejudice and hatred.”

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.): “The arguments against gay and lesbian marriage are essentially the same argument that we used to hear against black-white marriages.”

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.): “This bill isn’t conservative. It’s Big Brother to the core. My judgment is this is a subject that the federal government ought not stick its nose into.”

Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.): “Why do you want to destroy the love they hold in their hearts? Why do you want to crush their hopes, their dreams, their unions, their aspirations? We are talking about human beings, people like you.”

Rep. Steve Gunderson (R-Wis.): “Why shouldn’t my partner of 13 years be entitled to the same health insurance and survivor’s benefits that individuals around here, my colleagues with second and third wives are able to give to them?”

Rep. Patsy Mink (D-Hawaii): “It seems to be quite apparent that our court system is going to yield a decision which will validate same-sex marriage.”

Rep. Gerry Studds (D-Mass.): “We are going to prevail, Mr. Chairman. And we’re going to prevail just as every other component of the Civil Rights movement in this country has prevailed.”

Sen. Carol Moseley-Braun (D-Ill.): “I hope that every person on this floor who is going to look at and vote on this bill considers for a moment what the judgment of history might be if 50 years from now their grandchildren look at their debates and look at their words in support of this mean-spirited legislation, and consider the judgment that will be cast upon them then.”

Now Hillary is saying it was defensive and everyone knew this, but obviously many knew exactly how rotten that law was.

[Puglover]

5. Thanks for this Blue.

That anyone can defend this shite with a straight face is gobsmacking.

[Bluenorthwest]

7. Everyone who is defending it has a straight face, they are all straight people.

nt

[Puglover]

9. But but but but

an LGTB avatar makes it all good right? They are allies.

[Cha]

4. KICK

[Bluenorthwest]

6. Straight Hillary supporters exploiting issues they refuse to discuss with those who live the issues.

If you bring up issues that are not your own in service to your own agenda rather than to the issue, you are being exploitative. Drive by Straights hurling venom at LGBT from this Party's right is an old, tired tactic. Hillary needs to apologize for her DOMA revisionism.

[berni_mccoy]

8. Wait, they fact check someone's political beliefs? WOW, that's like fact checking someones opinion

And I don't know how they can say he had a wishy-washy stance, when he's never said he didn't support it. Unlike Clinton, who did say she opposed same-sex marriage.

[Bluenorthwest]

10. Hillary said it over and over for 17 years and she defended DOMA just last week.

Her supporters are very indifferent to the truth around LGBT issues because they see us as their inferiors. Note that the OP and others post these baits and never bother to discuss them. It's bait, they are gay baiting.

[PowerToThePeople]

11. ...

[DemocraticWing]

12. Shaming LGBTQ people for voting for somebody who actually supports us.

Look, you can cherry pick things all you want I guess. But Sanders has been on the side of the LGBTQ community for decades. Maybe he's not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than the active opposition we faced from Republicans and Centrist Democrats in that time.

We know from Bill that Hillary was personally uncomfortable with gay people as late as 2000. We know that she outright opposed marriage equality as late as 2013. We know that as Secretary of State she gave a great speech supporting us, and then tried to squash pro-gay reforms behind the scenes.

The straight Christian power structure only cares about us when it suits their individual needs. We make them uncomfortable apparently, threatening their so-called sacred bonds. I will not silently do their bidding in pitiful hopes they won't throw us under the bus again.