Agree or Disagree - Democrats should support gay marriage without question?

[kentuck]

Democrats should not back off on this issue? They should support it as a matter of "equal rights", political expediency be damned? Because it is the right thing to do? Is that your position?

I think this one issue has the potential to break apart the Democratic Party as we now know it. Gay marriage = equal rights? I personally support equal rights for everyone, including gay marriage- if gays wish to marry- however, I do not support the sacrifice of other "important" issues at the expense of this one issue. I understand that gays may consider this the most important issue in their lives. This is not a life or death issue to me, personally.

One more election where the gay marriage issue might be blamed for the defeat of the Democrats will not be acceptable for many in the Party. They will desert the Democratic Party in droves, I would suspect. It would be because of this one issue. Is it worth it? I know some will say that is impossible or highly unlikely. I would say much of it depends on the results of this election.

This is just my opinion, but I think we are treading on very dangerous grounds as a Party, even though I agree with Skinner that we may look back 40 years from now and see "opposition to gay marriage as bigoted and anachronistic as interracial marriage". But maybe not? We may look back and say what happened to the Democratic Party? That is my fear.

I value the survival of the Democratic Party more than I value this one issue. It is not by itself a definiton of "equal rights". There are many facets to equal rights - on the job, legally, and the right to not be discriminated against in other areas of life as well. "Marriage" by itself does not define "equal rights" in totality.

Again, I will repeat that I support equal rights and gay marriage but I caution everyone to understand the implications from a national perspective. Do we need gay marriage more than we need the Democratic Party? Most or many may think I am exaggerating the impact of this issue, but that is my opinion. I have faced the slings and arrows before on this topic.

[mike_c]

1. democats should not do anything "without question..."

...including supporting other democrats. That said, I completely agree that gay rights are on an equal footing with all other civil rights issues, and if the Democratic Party fractures over that issue then it does not deserve the support of people who respect the rights of others. Human rights and dignity are far more important than party loyalty.

[zanne]

2. Damn right

We can't support civil rights halfway.

[kentuck]

3. Well said, mike_c..

Best argument I've heard yet.

[LWolf]

16. You nailed this one. n/t

[WindRavenX]

17. word

:thumbsup:

Well said.

[JitterbugPerfume]

4. we should not accept anything out question,

and your post is very legitimate .but I am in total agreement with the Gay community on the marriage thing.

[rucky]

5. It's a no-brainer.

and should be presented as such.

[Ayesha]

6. You're exaggerating

That, and I just cannot accept that so many people hate ME so much that they'd vote against a party that otherwise represents their interests. It goes against everything I have personally experienced, the general sense of tolerance, even acceptance, I experience on a daily basis including from people from whom I wouldn't expect it.

You and a lot of other people have bought into the extreme rhetoric of the Christian right, that doesn't even represent the views of all of the people who belong to that group. And as long as you keep buying their shit, they'll keep shoveling it, and gay people, as well as the party as a whole, will suffer.

[kentuck]

9. I'm sure the Repubs would not use the issue...

if it did not work for them. I hope it doesn't work this time, but I think a lot of people believed it did work for them in the last election.

[Thickasabrick]

7. Disagree. If all supported it they would need to disclose that

when campaigning and many would not get elected based on that stance and where they are located. It's all about the demographic you come from.

I still think this is a constitutional issue - and shouldn't be legislated. Let them make their stupid laws, but in the end they will be ruled unconstitutional....in my perfect world.

[William769]

13. To bad your "perfect world" has no place in America.

And by the way, it's a Human rights issue!

[Thickasabrick]

15. I agree - and human rights should not have to be legislated.

[Caution]

8. Yes. It is 100% the right thing to do.

Why should anyone be expected to accept inequality?

[BobcatJH]

10. Agree

Agree. Agree. Agree. Agree. Agree.

[seasat]

11. I think the issue ought to be to take government out of marriage.

IMHO, the government support of marriage was partly from a perspective that we needed to support population growth. The opposite should be true now. What we need is for government to simply make available contracts for anyone that wishes for certain rights under the law. If they are a gay couple, two elderly widows, or anyone of legal age, we should allow them to have some sort of partner rights. We might even include a special clause for those that want to have kids so that some medical tests that are necessary, should be taken. However, our position ought to be that marriage is a religious act and should be between the couple and their religious views. The government should get out of that business and act simply as an enforcer of laws and contracts. IMHO, by putting it in this perspective, we come across as a protector of religious freedom and personal right.

[Mythsaje]

12. In a time when we're ALL losing civil rights

I think it's particularly dangerous to place too much importance on a single issue. I'm not sure pushing for "gay marriage NOW" is wise when the stakes involve a potentially disastrous loss to people who might just as soon kill you as look at you.

Of COURSE it's a Civil Rights issue. So's the repeal of Habeas Corpus. Or the pResident's new powers to declare martial law.

Welcome to New'Merica.

[Fleshdancer]

14. Fighting for equality is one of the major reasons why I'm a Democrat

Long ago I chose the Democratic Party because it was the party that shared my views on civil rights. The decision to grant new rights to those who were previously denied has never been easy and every battle included the "but what if it destroys the party?" debate. Sure there will always be growing pains but at the end of the day, equality makes our country stronger.

As for the Democratic Party, I believe that it is at its weakest when it refuses to stand up and fight for the basic principles that brought people to the party in the first place. When the party backs down from supporting the rights of women, homosexuals, minorities, unions, etc things begin to regress and I can't help but think we are paying dearly for that right now.

[election_2004]

18. Doesn't need to be Dems' sole focus

I'm gay. The issue is important to me. I understand that not all Democratic elected officials can afford to support same-sex marriages outright, due to the ideological leanings of the districts or states they represent (and need to get votes from).

However, if a politician (Dem, Republican, or Independent/3rd party) doesn't at least support the reasonable compromise of being open to same-sex civil unions, he/she can kiss my vote goodbye.

So, while I don't use full same-sex marriage as a litmus-test when deciding whether to give someone my vote...someone who wants to be my public servant needs to at least meet me halfway on this issue.

[some guy]

19. Agree

as the answer to the question in the thread title.

The Democratic response to questions about support for gay marriage should be, "Of course. What part of equal rights confuses you? Next question."

[madfloridian]

20. Yes, and all should allow women the right to contraceptives.

Pill form, whatever the doctor and woman decide.

The Democrats have allowed the Republicans to use a woman's right to NOT bear a child just as equally as they have misused the gay community's rights.

There should not even be a question to be asked.

A group Democrats called Democrats of Life recently introduced a bill that does not advocate use of contraception to cut down on abortions.

We need to have our party move into a world of reality.

Reality One: Women are not minorities. They should not be treated as a lesser group.

Reality Two: We have no right to tell a couple they don't have equal rights.

And that is coming from me with my Southern Baptist background.

[leesa]

21. Stop framing it as 'gay marriage'. Stop letting them name the issue. It

is civil and Constitutional rights.

[sendero]

22. I don't believe..

... the government should be involved in "marriage" at all. I believe that all "marriages" should be, from the government's standpoint, a contract called a Civil Union. Folks who want to be "married" should go to a church and get "married".

Civil unions should be available to anyone old enough to marry, of any gender combination. And all of the legal rights and benefits now acruing to those who are married should then go to anyone in a Civil Union.

[SouthernBelle82]

23. I think each person

can only speak on their own behalf. If I was running for an elected office where I had to tell my stance on the issue I wouldn't compromise for it because we all deserve to be treated as equals in society. I would explain to those who are religious that just because the government endorses and accepts something doesn't mean that church has to get involved. I think that is what a lot of people are afraid of who vote with the republicans on the issue in my opinion. It's all about changing minds and personal experiences. I love to watch the show "The Hill" from the Sundance Channel that is on Congressman Robert Wexler and one of his staff members (his press secretary) mother used to be against the idea but a fellow staff member of Wexler's is gay and is married and they have a son together and the mother met the family and fell in love with them and she for the first time voted with the democrats. I believe people will and are changing their mind on the issue. Here in my area of TN recently last week on the local news they reported that a lot of people weren't voting for the amendment because it was either weird language or they just didn't care about the issue anymore. I think it's good people care about the language because there might be something in there you disagree with and it shows me that people here anyways are independent thinkers and don't just vote for something because someone told them to or told them what the bill was about and that to me is some progress anyways.