Bill Richardson on homosexuality : "It's a choice."

[Bluebear]

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson waded into the contentious debate over whether homosexuality is innate or a personal choice. "It's a choice," he said, drawing gasps and hisses from the audience.

Apparently trying to recover, Richardson went on to say he doesn't know enough about the science to "categorize" people. "I'm not a scientist," Richardson said. "I don't see this as an issue of science or definition. I see gays and lesbians as human beings." He later issued a statement saying he "misunderstood the question."


...Richardson was on the ropes in the forum, sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign and the Logo channel, asked to defend his record on gay issues, including his vote for the Defense of Marriage Act, which denies federal recognition of same-sex marriages performed by states, as well as his use of a Spanish anti-gay epithet he used on Don Imus' radio show in 2006.

Richardson said he regrets voting for the Defense of Marriage Act, "a cheap political" measure that he said he would work as president to repeal.

He apologized for the slur, which he said was uttered by someone else on the radio show then repeated by him.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-debate_10aug10,1,3822021.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

[KitchenWitch]

1. OUCH!

I am guessing that is a moment he wants back.

[marmar]

2. He flubbed that one up with aplomb.....

You could hear crickets chirping in the LOGO studio after he said that. Melissa Etheridge's eyeballs did two 360s.

[Bluebear]

4. Etheridge smiley:

:crazy:

[marshall]

61. Following in Gore Vidal's footsteps?

It sounds like he is trying to line up with Vidal's "There are no homosexual people. There are only homosexual acts." But he really does need to explain himself better if he is going to go the sexual fluidity route.

[Madspirit]

3. k&r...n/t

[Hieronymus]

5. Buh bye, Bill ..

[roguevalley]

124. voting for him is a choice too, something I don't plan to do, the freak.

[Madspirit]

6. I Will Say This

It absolutely is not a choice but if it was I would still be a PROUD LESBIAN!
Lee

[Labors of Hercules]

92. Can't blame you there... If I were a woman, so would I!!!

:applause:

[Duppers]

7. oh my....oh my....oh my gawd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There's goes any chance he had as Hill's or Obama's or Edwards' running mate and fucking good riddance to him!

How can any half-way sane, informed, sensitive, and compassionate person make such a statement?!

[jgraz]

8. So is voting for Bill Richardson

Luckily, that's a choice we won't have to worry about for much longer.

[Pushed To The Left]

9. He didn't go over too well tonight!

It seems like he is trying to be overly cautious. The question about whether or not he would sign a marriage bill if it passed the legislature really froze him up! He didn't look happy when he left the stage. Very different from his charismatic performance at the California Convention in April.

[BlueStater]

10. He's been very weak in pratically every debate I've seen

He seems to just be one of those people who doesn't look good on TV.

[Double T]

11. No more ignorant politicians.

Richardson is out of here, pack it up.

[swag]

12. Poor dumbass. And poor us.

[Stargazer99]

13. Shows what an idiot he is....repeating the religious mantra

and not really aware of the gay community. Some choose that life type and some are just naturally bent in that direction. I know I lived in the gay community for several years avoiding any kind of relationship. I suppose those individuals that have both male and female attributes chose that too! What the hell do some people use for brains...oh yeah I forgot they use someone else's ignorance.

[Dangerously Amused]

14. Yeah Bill, it's all about how one chooses to use one's body.

Much like choosing to breathe.



Dumbass.

[Disturbed]

16. "He's been very weak in pratically every debate I've seen."

Yeah, he should keep being the Gov. of NM.

[puebloknot]

17. Oh, don't do that to us! (Writing from Santa Fe) nt

Luckily, my depression is helped by the fact that Dennis Kucinich spends a *lot* of time in New Mexico!

[Alexander]

15. Bill's on my shit list after allowing electronic voting machines in New Mexico...

This homophobic garbage is just another good reason not to vote for him.

[Liberal In Texas]

37. And he blocked the recount in NM in '04 when all kinds of votes disappeared

down a black hole.

(This from Greg Palast's book, "Armed Madhouse" that every DUer should read.)

Adios Bill.

[Alexander]

105. Yes. We can't trust Bill Richardson with our right to vote.

And homosexuals have absolutely no reason whatsoever to vote for him.

[bumblebee1]

18. Homosexuality, a choice?

I just picture a kid waking up in the morning saying "When I grow up, I want to be a cowboy, a baseball player and I also want to be gay."

[avrdream]

25. Pffffft!

I spit out my wine laughing on that one!

Good one for you.

Very bad one for Billy-boy. Had things been closer, this would have made a difference. As it stands, nah.

[Tesha]

33. Like this cowboy?

[Warren DeMontague]

19. But, really.. truly.. WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?

If it's a "choice" or not a "choice". Either way doesn't change the fact that gays and lesbians deserve equal rights, full rights, marriage rights. To imply that a "choice" is bad implies, at least a little bit, that it's a bad choice. I don't think it is.

(For the record, from a scientific point of view, I think a good deal of sexual orientation is driven by biology, so I don't think it's a choice. I didn't 'choose' to be heterosexual, either)

But... really, when it comes right down to it, who gives a shit if it's a choice or not? Seems to me the only ones especially hung up on whether or not it's a choice are religious right fucktards who want to justify their hate of gays by saying it's "their own fault".

Me? I don't give a shit. Choice, not a choice. I respect your choice, I respect your not-choice, most of all I respect your right to live your own damn life, do what you choose with your own damn body, and if you want to marry your partner I can't for the life of me figure why it should be any of my business, unless you invite me to the ceremony and reception.

[Laughing Mirror]

21. Once and for all: IT IS NOT A CHOICE

You don't choose to be who you are, you just ARE who you are.

Why is this so difficult for straight people to grasp?

[Warren DeMontague]

109. Probably the same reason that people seem totally unable to read what I wrote there

and instead, respond to someone that they seem to think they'd like to have a fight with.

I'm assuming your post was in response to mine, right? Did you read what I wrote?

[Laughing Mirror]

122. Yes I read exactly what you wrote and that's why I responded

Because I DO give a shit because IT IS NOT A CHOICE, so quit repeating it, quit insinuating that it just might be a choice, because it is not.

Are we clear now?

Thank you.

[Warren DeMontague]

126. Okay, you read what I wrote, and then totally ignored it.

What I said was, it shouldn't matter if it's a choice or NOT- should it? Can you stop fighting with the homophobic strawman you seem to think has wandered into the thread long enough to answer that one? IF being gay was somehow shown to be a "choice" (whatever that means) would that mean gays shouldn't have equal rights? Marriage rights?

And if, conversely, being gay was shown NOT be be a "choice" (again, whatever that means. Anyone who thinks we have a simple, deterministic explanation of what makes people tick or concepts like "free will" is high) ... so, if -as both you and I feel- it's not a choice, what then? Wouldn't that leave the door open for the religious right nutbats.. who, again, are the main folks focusing on this "question".. wouldn't that leave the door open for them to argue that it should be "cured"? And why is it insulting for it to be a choice? Wouldn't that mean there was something wrong with the choice? Do you think there's something wrong with people being gay? I don't. Wouldn't it make MORE sense to argue that whether or not it's a choice -or despite the fact that it clearly is NOT a choice- the question of "choice" is IMMATERIAL to the larger struggle for equal rights, tolerance, and acceptance?

Now, please, by all means- proceed to freak out at me, argue with some shit that I'm not saying, and order me to shut up :eyes: again. Thanks!

[Laughing Mirror]

135. Who's the one freaking out here?

All I'm trying to do is to set your mind at ease and tell you that you must stop worrying this second about whether being gay is a choice or not. Because it's not.

[Warren DeMontague]

136. Me: "blah blah blah". You: "Stop saying flarn flarn flarn"

Me: "No, I didn't say anything remotely resembling flarn flarn flarn. What I said was, blah blah blah."

You: "I don't know what your problem is, you have to keep going on about flarn flarn flarn."

Me: "No, I don't think you're listening to me. The point has nothing to do with flarn. What I said was, and this is the important part: blah blah blah."

You: "Again with the flarn. Stop worrying about this flarn flarn business"

Me: "Okay, you're obviously not going to hear me, no matter how many times I say blah blah blah. All you're going to hear is flarn. I give up."

And I do. Peace!

[Laughing Mirror]

141. oh you're very clever, id

;) !!!

[mwb970]

145. Boy, this sure is a dumb argument. Is it over? /nt

[treestar]

156. Why it is hard to grasp that it doesn't matter?

You assuming that if it's a choice, it's wrong.

[David__77]

27. I'm gay and I also say it doesn't matter what causes homosexuality.

I have no idea. I don't know and I don't really care. Homosexuality is perfectly moral, whether by genes or by "choice." I don't care if a "genetically-heterosexual" person decides to be gay if that's what makes them truly happy. My point - it's a good thing to be gay and to love someone of the same sex, just as heterosexuality is good - period.

[shimmergal]

35. Thanks, impeachdubya and David_77

It DOESN'T MATTER whether it's a choice or not. If "choice" is the deciding factor in whether it's OK to treat gays differently from straights, then it's equally OK to discriminate according to a person's religion.

[NNN0LHI]

86. I am straight and that makes complete sense to me n/t

[Katherine Brengle]

45. Because, if it's a "choice", then prejudice against it is legitimized.

I don't think it should matter either, to be honest, but in the reality we live in, it does matter, at least politically.

[Toasterlad]

60. I Completely Agree With Katherine Brengle.

And now, I can cross another phrase off my list of things I doubted I would ever say.

Kidding! :hi:

[Warren DeMontague]

116. Like I said, if you read the entirety of my post, when you cut to the chase, the people who it

matters the most to are the people who are looking to justify their bigotry by saying being gay is gay people's fault. For the record, again, I happen to believe it is NOT a choice. I also think Richardson handled the question very badly.

What I would have said, if I were running for office, would be something like this: "I don't believe being gay is a choice, but the larger question people should be asking themselves is, why does it matter to them whether it is or not? The real question isn't why are people gay,but why shouldn't they have equal rights? Why shouldn't they be able to marry? Why shouldn't they have the same inheritance rights, hospital visitation rights, parental rights, marriage rights, civil rights as the rest of us? Those, to me, are the real questions."

[treestar]

158. It's not legitimized to sensible people

To how many fundies does it really make a difference anyway.

Is there any population that believes gay people deserve equal rights only if it's genetic? And that they don't if it's a choice?

That would be a group that sees it as a handicap, too. Too bad they were born that way, so we'll treat them with mercy.

Then what if it ever is scientifically proved not to be genetic? There's nothing to fall back on.

Humans get to live how they want as long as they don't hurt anybody else. I say stick with that.

[ruggerson]

49. It's a big fucking difference

the religious right bases their whole war on gays and lesbians on the preposterous notion that it's a "choice." This is why little children are sent off to "pray the gay away" bible prison schools, BECAUSE THESE FUCKERS THINK IT"S A "CHOICE" that can somehow be "changed."

It's no more a choice than blue eyes or left handedness.

Your argument, if made in the fifties and sixties could have been, well who cares if blacks are "genetically inferior", they still deserve equal rights, cause they're human beings. Which would have been noxious, backhanded support.

It. Is. Not. A. Choice>

And anyone who doesn't get that, doesn't get GLBT people.

[Warren DeMontague]

108. Okay, I'm glad you think my support is "noxious" and "backhanded".

Either you're unable to read, or you're so reflexively knee-jerk hung up on the word "choice" that you couldn't see through your own reaction to my first sentence, and didn't hear the rest of what I said.

Do you think that equal rights for gays should be contingent upon it NOT being a "choice"? I don't. Seems to me that's the noxious, backhanded, backwards-ass position, not mine.

Like I said, I don't GIVE A SHIT if it is a choice or NOT, (I happen to think it isn't, I guess you missed that part, too) because even if it IS a choice, that doesn't change the fundamental question of full and equal rights.

[mondo joe]

71. I wouldn't mind if he simply said "It doesn't matter if it's a choice..." for the

reasons you describe - which I agree with.

But I think saying it IS a choice is different.

[cboy4]

91. Here's what difference it makes. It allows the right wing homophobes

to say, "look, even a liberal like Bill Richardson agrees that it's a choice."

Not only that, it irritates gay people like myself when I hear people say it's a choice.

The idea that it's a choice makes it that much tougher for gays and lesbians to achieve equal rights.

[Warren DeMontague]

117. I'm not saying Richardson handled it well, at all.

But my point is the same as yours, the folks especially hung up on it not being a "choice" are the folks looking to justify discrimination. Perhaps, while simultaneously pointing out that it is NOT a choice, the point could be made -unequivocally, unapologetically- to the right wing homophobes that "You know what? People deserve equal rights, assholes. Gay, Straight. Choice, Biology. Period. End of Story."

[LostinVA]

118. Exactly

I choose to drive a certain car or wear certain clothes.

[Warren DeMontague]

137. So it's okay to discriminate against you on the basis of your car and clothes. Right?

Because, you know, those are "choices".

[truth2power]

149. Oh my!! Impeachdubya, I think I understand what you are trying to say..

Wait....let me put on my flame-proof suit here. O...kay!

There are TWO SEPARATE ISSUES here.

1. Homosexuality - choice/not choice? (Hang in there and read on. Take a breath).

2. Should people who are gay have the same (equal) rights as anyone else in society?

I think what you are saying is that one is not dependent on the other. IMO, regarding choice/not choice, that question has been asked and answered. From everything I've read and from talking to gay friends of mine, being gay is NOT a choice.

However, if there are folks out there who would like to gather with friends and discuss that issue into the wee hours - BE MY GUEST. I'll decline your invitation to attend, thanks anyway, because I think it's a pointless endeavor, for reasons stated above. Whatever you decide, though - it will not change ONE IOTA the answer to question #2, the more important question: Should people who are gay have the same rights as anyone else in society? This should be the focus.

#1 is not dependent on #2.



edit> changed "is not relevant to" to "is not dependent on". Don't know if that makes it any more clear.

[Warren DeMontague]

154. Thank you! One, I'm not defending Richardson's answer, and Two, I'm not saying it IS a "choice".

I thought I made that really clear. What I'm saying is, gay people deserve equal rights. Inculding marriage rights. Period. End of story. Whether or not it's a "choice" should be completely immaterial to that fact.

I really wasn't trying to start a big flame-a-thon, either. I actually thought what I was saying was pretty obvious. Thanks.

[mwb970]

144. Extreme Christian wackos NEED for it to be a choice.

How could they condemn someone for something they can't help? They'd be shouted off the stage. Therefore, in order to properly hate gays, the gays have to have chosen to be evil sinners. Who cares what common sense indicates? Who cares what research shows? Who cares what gay people themselves say?

"We want to hate them, and in order for us to hate them they have to be responsible for their gayness, therefore they are." QED.

[Warren DeMontague]

155. Right, because if it's not a choice then "God" made them that way.

Of course, the ones who can accept modern medicine could conceivably argue that it should be "cured", if it's not a "choice".

My point is, rather than wrangling with the religious right about why people are gay, how about getting them to explain why their fellow citizens shouldn't have equal rights?

[treestar]

159. These same whackos, if it were proven to be genetic

would not suddenly become reasonable. There are other people they look down on for genetic based difference, like race and gender. This would just become another.

The entire issue is probably created by the right wing - one of those "excuses" they make, hoping to get everyone arguing about it, while they plan on persecuting gay people as much as they can no matter what.

It's like their shifting Iraq War excuses. Oh well, no WMD. It's to bring democracy to the Iraqis, which you should favor, you stupid liberals, etc., etc.

[Neshanic]

20. Buh Bye Bill, Thanks for playing! BUH BYE! I'm not a moron, but I play one in New Mexico.

He's no scientist. That's a relief!

[Cameron27]

22. Offensive idiot,

the sooner he gets out of this race the better.

[Horse with no Name]

23. He is the quintessential politician

and THAT isn't a compliment.

[AndyTiedye]

24. If You Have a Choice, Doesn't That Mean You are Bi?

[FreeState]

26. No

bi people do not choose either - they just are. They do not wake up and choose men or women - just because Im gay does not make all men attractive to me. One does not usually choose to fall in love - they just do.

[Anais_98]

28. not all

I've chosen to be bi. I don't 'have' to be with men, nor do I 'have' to be with women. I chose this lifestyle. But that does not mean my sexuality is in way any less valid nor does it mean that everyone who is bisexual, or homosexual, has chosen it. If someone feels that they have been born this way, I repect that. But there are websites by homosexuals and bisexuals who, like me, claim that they 'chose' their sexuality. We need to recognise them too.

[Disturbed]

29. When I was in my teens I tried both.

I felt more attracted to females, although I still find some men attractive. I think that most people have a tendency genetically towards their sexuality. America is not progressive in most areas of social life. Unfortunately, we that are progressive. must constantly fight for equality on many fronts.

[xfundy]

30. Yes, of course.

Everyone knows websites never lie.

[Anais_98]

31. sarcasm detected

I never said that the all websites are geniune. This is the internet, no one can be sure anyone is who they say they are. All I'm saying is that we need to consider the possibility that there are a multitude, rather than only one, experience

[LostinVA]

54. Again, you don't choose your sexual orientation, period

[bullwinkle428]

51. Your comment "I've chosen to be bi" strikes me as kind of odd -

it seems like you either find yourself attracted to both genders or you don't. Who you decide to become involved individually with is certainly a choice, but I can't see anyone waking up and saying "I think I want to feel a sense of attraction to both men & women!"

[LostinVA]

53. You do not choose your sexual orientation

You can choose to deny it or to force your behavior, but that is it.

Oh, I'm so surprised you posted this. NOT.

[Anais_98]

62. what

how can this be a 'progressive' environment when so many people are willing to tell me what i am and am not. To say that sexuality is biologically determined, and that I have got to be hetrosexual, homosexual or bisexual seems rather oppressive. I know a lot gay or bisexual people would say that they feel that they are born into their sexuality and that they can not possible deny their orientation. However, I feel I could, partly I feel my sexuality was so much influenced by my environment. A few years ago I gained a lot of gay friends which led to me learning about theories of sexuality and becoming very involved in the gay community.
Honestly, i don't feel I have a preference for hetrosexuality, homosexuality, or asexuality. But I don't have to explain to anyone here...

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Anais_98]

74. essentialism at its worst

"And by gender, I mean what gender you actually innately are."

So we are either men or women inside. Gay or Straight. Black and white> no gray, no overlap. Very simple and straight forward. Thanks for explaining that. Personally I believe there is a continuum of sexuality, gender, political leanings etc> so few people are 100% "male", 100% straight or 100% right wing. How can you say you rhat you respect my feelings and then call its crap in the same breathe.

And i did not catch the gay bug. I learnt to be more accepting, more tolerant, less homophobic and more open-minded.

[Name removed]

76. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LostinVA]

78. Whatever -- spin what I say anyway you want

You know I didn't say anything at all like that, about the rigidity of who we are. I only said it's all innately who we are, not a choice by any means. Someone can die their brown hair blond, but they still have brown hair. I can wear blue contacts, but I still have green eyes. This is no different.

You know your sexual orientation isn't a choice, no matter how many times you repeat that it is.

God, I can't wait till classes start...

[LostinVA]

80. I see you couldn't handle the truth

Boo hoo.

[Anais_98]

82. ...

I'm not going to resort to using petty juvenile tactics like name-calling. Just stops people from engaging in provocative discourse.

[LostinVA]

103. I never name called -- EVER

[Anais_98]

139. really?

..."you are like glass"

What's that huh? Yeah, you sound really friendly, no bitchyness at all. Anyway, I'm not going to waste my time on you.

[LostinVA]

146. How was that name calling? It wasn't

You are very transparent, and saying so broke no DU rules, only your little feelings. And no, I wasn't being bitchy -- which IS name calling on DU. I also think it's very interesting that other people have said worse to you than I have, yet I'm the one you're attacking.

[Anais_98]

147. really?

Interesting...If I do remember correctly, you posted a rather rude message about me only yesterday, which had to be removed by the moderators because it broke DU rules. Therefore I don't think you can honestly claim that you are innocent of namecalling, otherwise your message wouldn't have been removed.
And I'm not attacking you, just telling the truth.

[Madspirit]

150. You wouldn't know the truth if it jumped up and bit you on the ass..

I didn't choose to be a lesbian. What a dork-assed thing to say. Of course, if it was a choice, I would still be a lesbian.

Lee

[Anais_98]

160. Not talking about you

This is wat I believe is true for me. I'm not making a judgement on you. As I said earlier if you have a different experience, I'll respect. As long as others don't try and tell me who or what I am.
As far as truth goes, I was simply presenting irrefutable evidence that Lostinva has been abusive towards me. Though it seems he/she has become become strangely quiet.

[LostinVA]

161. Wow. Unreal.

[Toasterlad]

69. Sweetie, I'm Not Going to Tell You Who or What You Are.

I AM going to tell you that if you are bi, you were BORN with an orientation that includes both genders. You didn't "choose" to be attracted to women. You didn't "choose" to be attracted to men. You were BORN with the capacity to be attracted to either gender, just as I was BORN with an attraction to men.

You can call it a "choice" if it makes you feel all empowered and whatnot, and you can certainly CHOOSE to date men or women exclusively, but you do not control your attractions, and you cannot make yourself straight, or gay. If you're bi, you were BORN that way.

And no, you don't have to explain yourself to anybody. But if you post crap, expect to be called on it.

[LostinVA]

72. Good post

[David__77]

85. Sometimes I think most people are born bisexual.

I think that there are degrees of hetero- and homosexuality in many, many people, and that the strength of the tendencies can relatively change over the course of someone's life for various reasons. Trying to wrap human sexuality into one box - deterministic "choice" or mechanistic "biology" - is too restrictive to really capture the complexity of sexuality in conscious human beings. That said, it is most emphatically not a "choice" to be sexually attracted to what one is sexually attracted to. Whether or not the homo or hetero component is biologically determined is still an open question due to minimal high-quality scientific research.

I would hope that all progressives can agree that homosexuality and gay identity or positive things that should be defended. I also appeal to other gay men and lesbians to realize that even if there were universal consensus that that IS genetic, this will not greatly diminish religious-based bigotry, and will perhaps also open up a new field of research to engineer away homosexuality. I am not concerned about this though, again, because I do not believe that it is possible to engineer something as complex as sexual orientation, which is likely jointly determined by many factors.

[helderheid]

98. BRAVO!!!!

[Madspirit]

151. Today's Heroes are Lost in WVA and Toasterlad!!...

I already recommended Bluebear's thread. I wish I could recommend y'all's posts.

Thank-you.

Lee

[LostinVA]

162. Even though I'm abusive?

[Anais_98]

32. klj

[Ian David]

34. I caught the tail end of that, and to me he came across as a well-intentioned idiot.

I missed the part about DOMA and the slur.

All I saw was him looking morbidly uninformed and inexcusably ignorant.

[xultar]

36. I'd agree. I'm so shocked. From that alone I'd tell him to hang it up.

[xultar]

38. errr ahhhh.... hang it up Bill.

[THUNDER HANDS]

39. i'm confilcted and confused about this

I understand the contention that gay people are born the way they are, that finding someone who they're attracted to has little do with a conscious decision to be gay or straight. And I'm pretty sure I believe being gay or straight is something you're born with.

But then I look at someone like former NJ governor Jim McGreevy, who dated women, married, had kids and wonder - if he was gay, how was he able to have sex with his wife?

Or any gay man who pretends to be straight to try to fit in.

How do they have sex with women? How do they get arroused enough to fake it for so long?

I don't get that part.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. Sexual Arousal Is A Reflexive Response

And Kinsey would argue there are degrees of heterosexuality and homosexuality...

[Katherine Brengle]

46. Lots of people fake it.

Regardless of sexual orientation.

[IndianaJones]

47. I'm straight...how am I able to masturbate? nt.

[LostinVA]

55. I dated and had sex with men until well into my 20's

You try to deny who you are because of religious, family, societal factors. Lots of gay people have been married and had kids -- many still are. They live a lie. They try to "pass," just as light-skinned African Americans lived a lie and passed as white in a white society. By denying who they are. And, THAT is the shame, for both gay people and blacks.

Saying it's a choice just gives Ex Gay and other RWs a reason to deny us rights.

[cboy4]

93. How was he able to have sex with his wife? Have you heard of

thinking about someone else while you're doing it?

Lots of gays and lesbians have "experimented" with the opposite sex, including myself.

[progressoid]

40. Bill Richardson? Who's he?

[goaman]

41. choice my ass

he gets on my nerves

[Maven]

43. Apparently Richardson issued a statement to "clarify" within minutes after the thing ended

And also spoke to Pam from Pam's House Blend about his "error:"

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2585

Pam: "Bill Richardson self-immolated on live TV."

[cboy4]

95. He's grasping at straws because he got caught with his hand

in the cookie jar (so to speak) when he was called out on what he said.

I believe deep down inside he really does think it's a choice, which is extremely disappointing.

[NewJeffCT]

44. I used to have him as a top choice for Sec. of State

but, this may move him off the list unless he does more than says that he misunderstood the question!

[LostinVA]

48. Ummm.... great

And, trying to worm out of what he said, and meant.

[IndianaJones]

50. whats more surprising...his view or the fact that he let it be known in public? nt.

[gatorboy]

52. No, Bill. Voting for you is a choice.

Guess which choice most will take.

[wicket]

57. After this, my choice is easy

:D

[VP505]

56. Well, well

add that to the ever expanding list of reasons why I won't be voting for Richardson.

[terrya]

58. "It's a choice" "maricon"...it's not looking good for you, Bill.

I'm getting less and less impressed with him.

[LostinVA]

59. I MAY have thought he just fumbled -- MAYBE -- but the "maricon" cemented it for me

Ugh. He knows what it means.

[TZ]

63. Wow. Incredibly stupid

I was liking him before this. I thought he was an educated guy. He doesn't know enough about the science? The studies on the biological basis of homosexuality has been around for years. You would have THOUGHT that knowing what forum he was going to be in he would have done SOME research. My respect for his intelligence just went WAY down.

[LostinVA]

67. When did Richardson choose to be straight?

Ugh. How disappointing.

[Toasterlad]

64. They Should Have Asked EVERYONE the "Choice" Question.

Of course, it would be rather invalid after the first person answered it (and I have no doubt that Obama would have flubbed it almost as badly as Richardson) and the rest of the candidates watching off stage had a chance to gauge reaction and formulate their answers. Still, I would like to have been given the opportunity to try and read them, and see if they believed what they were saying.

Richardson was clearly the worst of the bunch last night, but Clinton wasn't that far behind. Her "leave it to the states" plan should cause any self-respecting homosexual to drop her flat. Hey, Hillary - should we have left racial equality up to the states as well? She does NOT speak for us, and it was clear from beginning to end that she considers GLBT issues a very low priority, along with the GLBT community.

[indigo32]

125. "they should have asked Everyone"

I agree. It was VERY enlightening. But you are right... after the first one it wouldn't have been quite the same.

[The Stranger]

65. Wow, so the guy fucks up the answer which is clearly inconsistent with his position, and he's done?

Come on, people. You know this man better than that.

[Toasterlad]

73. How Is His Thinking Homosexuality is a Choice Inconsistent With His Position?

Just by reading this thread, you can find many people who support GLBT rights, who don't care if it's a choice.

Personally, while Richardson is dead wrong on the choice bit, that didn't bother me all that much, assuming his track record on GLBT issues is what he says it is. I'm even willing to overlook the Imus thing, because that's the kind of stupid-ass thing that happens on shows like Imus and Stern.

What bothered me about Richardson last night was that he seemed clearly unprepared and rather uncomfortable appearing there. No matter what he's done in the past, or what he says he plans to do in the future, he did not strike me as a man who cares deeply about these issues.

[The Stranger]

77. Being unprepared and uncomfortable may be forgiven, but not being bigoted.

I don't think anyone believes the latter. He was clearly unprepared and this is a problem. But it can be addressed without throwing him under the bus so early in the campaign. His campaign needs to make sure he gets the message on this issue and is prepared next time.

[terrya]

84. As a gay man and IF he's the nominee...

why the fuck should I contribute to his campaign?

It's fucking bad enough that he voted for DOMA, that he doesn't support same-sex marriage and my legal rights to full equality...but when he starts throwing around the Spanish version of "faggot"...it's a little too goddamned much, you know?

[The Stranger]

112. Yes, it is too much.

Hopefully, this will spur him to some real action on behalf of GLBT constituents. A wake up call, if you will.

[Richard Steele]

68. He goes to a forum sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign and flubs THAT question? SHEESH!

I don't want him in the White House. Sorry, Bill, but that's
just an amazing display of unpreparedness. And your "I misunderstood
the question" excuse just makes it worse.

[TZ]

70. My point exactly!

It shows a serious character/intelligence flaw which makes me wonder about leadership qualities. We don't NEED more ignorance in the WH!!:grr:

[terrya]

143. Very good point

I mean, he DID know what kind of forum this was, right?

[SharonRB]

75. He lost my second-choice vote with that one

Now if Gore doesn't run, I don't know what I'm going to do.

[ceile]

79. Well, crap. I guess I'll be voting for Edward's in the primary now.

I knew he wasn't perfect, but he does have the most experience of any of the others. I can't believe those words came out of his mouth.

[LostinVA]

83. Edwards isn't really better

He's totally against marriage equality on religious grounds.

[David__77]

88. So who is better on gay rights issues?

I know Kucinich has good positions, but he obviously has no chance to be the nominee.

I cannot detect policy differences between Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. I support Obama because I trust him more to be a proactive progressive, but they all seem to have the "civil unions, not marriage" perspective that's been national Democratic orthodoxy lately.

[Laughing Mirror]

114. Yes, only Gravel & Kucinich so far consider us equal human beings

Clearly, the three major candidates consider gay, lesbian, bi & trans Democrats to be their inferiors, yet they are clamoring for our money and our vote.

[Ms. Toad]

148. Read their responses to Question # 6

http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section=Home&CONTENTID=36930&TEMPLATE=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm

They had the luxury of time to craft written answers,they were all asked the same questions (unlike the "choice" question only Richardson had the chance to flub). They all answered the basic question in a way I find unacceptable, but given that one of the three is likely to be my choice in November I find their answers instructive:

I find Obama's answer offensive because it indicates to me a fixed position that does not match the law (which views marriage as a contract between the couple and the state, but which has provisions to accommodate religious marriages and to treat them as secular marriages so long as all other qualifications {gender of parties, relationship, age} are met). It also shows ignorance of or, refuses to acknowledge, the growing acceptance of same gender marriages within many faith communities. Respecting the religious aspects ought to logically push him toward legal recognition - at least - of the many same gender marriages that have already occurred within religious communities, rather than supporting his opposition of them. Particularly given his family history, in which his parents marriage could have obtained recognition within a faith community (like the Religious Society of Friends) long before that religious marriage was ever granted state recognition.

I find Edwards answer refreshingly honest. He says he is personally struggling - that says to me that he is open to education and change, which is consistent with growth I have seen in him on these issues.

I don't trust Clinton. She is politically expedient - just like her husband who brought us DOMA (I don't blame him for passing it, but what he could have done, with integrity, was to allow it become law without his signature). Right now, we are acceptable collateral damage, and until we become otherwise I cannot trust her (which is a general challenge I find with her - she would govern not based on her own principles, but on what would allow her to be elected a second term).

[cboy4]

97. The one reason I think Edwards might be slightly (and I mean slightly!)

better is the fact that Elizabeth is in favor of marriage equality.

And you never know. Maybe she can ultimately convince him. :)

[LostinVA]

100. OMG -- you're alive

[ceile]

115. Really?!

I guess I just assumed that it was a non-issue for him. Double crap!
I guess I need to start paying better attention. It's just that no one has inspired me to stay focused like Dean did in '03. Where's Howard when we need him?

[LostinVA]

120. Yeah, I was very, very disappointed when he said that

I saw him as a good second choice for me.

[slackmaster]

81. Hoo boy

Threw himself under the bus in terms of getting the Democratic nomination.

The really sad thing is that point of view might actually have worked in his favor in the general election, because a lot of people out there are still ignorant on the subject.

[David__77]

87. Yikes, that was stupid.

I don't care about the "choice or not" argument and it strikes me as a tiresome debate that shouldn't matter. If I was asked about that, I'd say:

"I'm not a scientist and I'm not terribly familiar with research into that question. What I do know is that people deserve equal rights, respect, and dignity regardless of sexual orientation."

Religion is certainly a "chosen" characteristic if ever there was one, and yet it forms a legally-protected class under anti-discrimination laws. "Innateness" does not automatically confer a protective blanket. Gay rights are human rights and should be upheld because homosexuality is good.

[ToeBot]

89. And here I was bemoaning his republican trade policies. Richardson -> Toast. nt

[npincus]

90. No, but voting is.

[helderheid]

94. Yes it is a choice...

on whether to stay in the closet or not. That is the only choice - not whether or not they are G, B, L or T.

Jeebus, Bill!

[bullwinkle428]

96. The "I misunderstood the question" makes him look exactly

like Tommy Thompson in the Repug debate a couple of months back, where he stated a flat-out "yes" to the question regarding an employer's right to fire an employee because they were gay. Thompson tried to weasel out with some lame-ass explanation about needing to use the bathroom! :nopity: :rofl:

[cboy4]

99. Oh come on Bill. Why would anyone choose a life of persecution?

I like my life, but it's not an easy life.

He may have apologized, but I'm not convinced he truly believes it.

Otherwise he wouldn't have said it.


edit: typo

[LostinVA]

101. My thoughts exactly

[IndianaJones]

106. I would expect such a statement from a 'roids enabler....

whens the last time you won a title, pal? you have no right to post here!

[cboy4]

113. LOL. Have I told you how much I like you? :)

Everyone in this thread is now saying, "cboy4 takes steroids? What is a title?" LOL!!!!!!!

[IndianaJones]

128. We are a very rare breed around here my friend...

and as fellow 'roid monsters, we must stick together.

[BlackVelvet04]

102. It was an incredibly stupid things to say, but looks at his record:

Governor Bill Richardson has an accomplished record fighting for the rights of all Americans. Since taking office, Governor Richardson has:

1. Expanded anti-discrimination laws to include sexual orientation.
2. Signed into law the state's first hate crimes legislation for acts including those based on sexual orientation.
3. Provided state health insurance for domestic partnerships.
4. Signed the Billy Griego HIV and AIDS Act, which was designed to ensure that consumers are the focus of the funding and services provided in all the state's HIV and AIDS cases.
5. Created the state's first HIV and AIDS Policy Commission charged with reviewing and making recommendations on state HIV and AIDS policies. The commission also studies and makes recommendations on all factors affecting the availability, quality and accessibility of health services for persons with HIV and AIDS.
6. Called a Special Session of the NM State Legislature to push for Domestic Partnerships Legislation, among other issues, after it failed by one vote in the Senate during the Regular Session. Governor Richardson has pledged to push for the legislation again during the next Legislative Session.

[NastyDiaper]

104. He didn't know that was a winger 'hotword' to justify persecution.

I like Richardson, I don't think he's the one but I like Richardson.

To me this says far more about a foot-in-mouth problem than his position on social issues.

[Larissa238]

107. To every person who says it's a choice to be gay

I want them to tell me without stuttering that they could have sex with a person of the same gender if they wanted to, because it seems to be an easy choice to them.

Or ask them why they chose to be straight.

To every poll that asks if being gay is a choice, it should ask "Could you have sex with someone of the same gender?" I think the polls would look different if it was asked this way. It's all a choice to them. It's never about the genes and the maternal hormones.

*sigh*

[IndianaJones]

110. Don't necessarily agree with you....however, homosexuality is not a choice.nt.

[LostinVA]

121. I've asked people both of those things before

It's quite an eye opener for some of them.

[bigtree]

111. don't form an opinion on just one article, here's a better representation of his support

2/22/2007

What about Bill?

Laura Kiritsy
[e-mail]

Concord, N.H. — “He’s actually been wonderful. He’s kept every promise he’s ever made to the community.” Anyone remember the last time you heard an LGBT political activist say that about a candidate for the White House? It certainly can’t be said about Bill Clinton, whose 1992 campaign pledge to let gays serve openly in the military resulted in the disastrous “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. Ditto for John Kerry, whose reputation for being a longstanding champion of gay civil rights went bust when he came out for anti-gay marriage amendments in Massachusetts and Missouri in the heat of the 2004 campaign. But that’s how Alexis Blizman, the executive director of Equality New Mexico, sums up Democrat Bill Richardson’s record on LGBT issues as governor of her home state.

{snip}

The governor appears to be gearing up to make his support for LGBT rights more widely known on the presidential campaign trail. Though he didn’t mention it on the stump in Concord, at the Democratic National Committee’s annual winter meeting earlier this month Richardson was the only speaker on the roster — which included other presidential contenders Sen. Joe Biden, Clinton, Sen. Christopher Dodd, Edwards, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Obama, and Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack — to raise the issue. “I want to tell you, too, in New Mexico, our fight for equality extends to sexual orientation,” he told attendees, touting the state’s LGBT-inclusive civil rights laws and its domestic partner benefits for state workers. “Some call New Mexico the land of enchantment. I now like to think that we live in a state of enlightenment.” On top of that, he’s scheduled to deliver the keynote address at a Human Rights Campaign dinner in Los Angeles on March 24.

He certainly has a few things to talk about. In 2003, Richardson followed through on campaign pledges to sign into law LGBT-inclusive hate crimes and non-discrimination bills, making New Mexico one of just a handful of states to include transgender people in state’s civil rights laws. Not only did he sign the legislation, said Blizman, “he actively helped work the legislators to make sure it passed.” Richardson also issued a 2003 executive order providing domestic partner benefits to gay state employees. In 2005 he came out in opposition to proposed state DOMA legislation, unless it contained a civil unions or domestic partnership provision (the bill eventually died); he has also spoken out against a federal anti-gay marriage amendment. Blizman, who is supporting Richardson in his quest for the White House, says that Richardson is behind Equality New Mexico’s push to pass a comprehensive domestic partnership bill that would provide two “non-familial” adults with all of the state-level rights afforded to married couples.

Richardson’s support for LGBT rights extends back to his years in Congress, where he represented New Mexico’s 3rd Congressional District for 14 years until 1997. He opposed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and supported a range of other gay-friendly legislation.

Now, for the downside: In 1996, Richardson voted in favor of the federal DOMA; he continues to oppose same-sex marriage. Asked if he stood by his DOMA vote in a brief interview after the Concord event, Richardson replied, “Yeah. I do.” He went on to add that, “I think that New Mexico has the most pro-gay rights legislation because of me and I’m going to continue that. We have domestic partnerships, we have a hate crimes law, we’re the first state to recognize transgender and as president I would continue that.” But on the issue of gay marriage, said Richardson, “I’m just not there. I want to be honest.”

Will Richardson’s DOMA vote hurt him with LGBT voters? After all, with the exception of Kucinich, who is on record in support of marriage equality, his position doesn’t differ from any of the other Democratic candidates, all of whom oppose civil marriage but support either civil unions or domestic partnerships for same-sex couples. That’s why Blizman doesn’t think it will. “I think he’s got the experience on foreign policy, I think he’s good on the issues I care about,” she says. “Obviously, with the DOMA he’s not perfect, but he’s better than the other candidates. At least he’s willing to be there and take a stand.”

Not so fast, says Matt Foreman, the executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) . . .

http://baywindows.com/ME2/Audiences/dirmod.asp?sid=008EC9FBCFF24AD18614290016BE1303&nm=Current+Issue&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&AudID=0813BC739F2044E5A03DCF2DE3FDF7C9&tier=4&id=DE28FE4B33E043EF97576A4A91448621


Bill Richardson was one of only a handful of lawmakers to vote against "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

Governor Richardson was Congressman Richardson back in 1993, when lawmakers were debating "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and wading through a swamp of anti-gay sentiment on Capitol Hill. But Richardson stood out even then as a champion of lesbian and gay service members. He was one of only a handful of lawmakers to vote against the law, advocating instead for the right of gay personnel to serve openly.
http://citizenchris.typepad.com/citizenchris/2007/01/another_bill_be.html

From Day 1, Richardson made clear that anything less than full citizenship for gay service members was simply unacceptable.

Today, Governor Richards continues to support open service, and a repeal of the ban. This entry from The Bill Richardson Blog also points out that the Governor is an outspoken advocate on other issues important to the LGBT community, too.
http://billrichardsonblog.com/?p=214

http://freedomtoserve.blogspot.com/2007/01/bill-richardson-long-time-champion-of.html



http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

[Madspirit]

119. OK...he's not Evil but he is STUPID...

Some are saying if it was a choice who would choose it because of the persecution. I say, even if it was a choice, I would choose it. I'm a happy proud lesbian and my sexuality isn't the only thing I've had to fight for my entire life. I'm kind of used to the abuse. ...and my lesbianism is one of the few parts of my life that gives me joy. So I would choose it.

The point is, it is NOT a choice and that is so elementary. I just don't want to vote for anyone who is stupid. We have a Stupid President right now. How is that working out for you?

It should not have been something he fumbled about. He shouldn't need cue cards to answer it correctly. Do YOU choose to be heterosexual? This is so elementary. It's not like he flubbed on a question about advanced physics. No one asked him to solve one of the million dollar millennium challenges. This should be something people just "GET". It's an obvious thing UNLESS you consider us a totally alien species and cannot relate to us at all. Did he choose to be a heterosexual? The answer should not even be something he has to think about. Sorry, he gets no break from me if he can't use his brain and his heart.

Lee

[justiceischeap]

123. It is about choice...

but not the kind you think.

Here are the choices I made in life:
I chose to marry a man at the age of 19 because I was afraid of telling and accepting that I was gay. I'd known it from an early age but the fear that my parents would no longer love and accept me was too great to be honest until I was 21.

I chose to have sex with my husband (however unenjoyable it was for me)

I chose to be honest with myself at the age of 21 about my sexuality and in turn chose to be honest with my family and friends (and everyone after)

I chose not to hide in the closet.

I chose my girlfriends and wife.

I chose to be happy.

So yes, in sexuality there are choices but to wake up one day and say, "Okay, I think I'm gonna be gay or straight now" just doesn't happen. I'll give the one poster that some people do make the conscience decision to sleep with same sex partners the majority do not. However, I also agree that using the phrase "it's a choice" indulges bigotry, homophobia, etc. but it goes much deeper than that. People who think it's a choice are uninformed or chose to be uneducated. There are some minds that will never be changed on this issue and I think Richardson is one of those people. His answer was too quick and no amount of backpeddling will change my mind on that.

As far as marriage/civil unions, it's all about semantics. I see politicians using the phrase "civil unions" as a way to ease most people who don't get it, into being comfortable with calling it marriage in the long run. Whether that's good or bad is up to the individual to decide but as I stated in another post, as long as I get the rights I'm entitled to under the Constitution, right now, I could care less what they call it. Maybe as a lesbian I'm setting back the fight but I'm just trying to look at the long-term instead of the right now and maybe my line of thinking is wrong.

[BlooInBloo]

127. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER IT'S A CHOICE OR NOT - THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH IT.

[redqueen]

132. It matters whether people think it's a choice.

That belief encourages discrimination.

[BlooInBloo]

133. No. Sigh. The question itself embodies the presupposition that there's something wrong with it....

... Sheesh. People never stop falling for framing that loses the game from the get-go.

[redqueen]

134. yeah, sheesh!

everyone's sooooo stupid but you!

glad you're here to set us straight!

;)

[KamaAina]

129. If he hadn't already lost me by supporting forced treatment for mental illness,

he would've lost me right then and there.

But hey, maybe he could be Imus' replacement! :sarcasm:

[LordJFT]

130. Richardson sounds so dumb when he talks

I seriously think if he became president he would be the George Bush of democrats. The choice question was posed so clearly you'd have to be a moron not to understand it. And when he said he thought civil unions were more "achievable" than marriage they asked him hypothetically if he would sign a marriage bill if it passed in his legislature and he still said he would pursue civil unions because they're more "achievable." Do you have to fucking spell it out? Obviously if the bill passed in your legislature that's clear evidence that it is achievable.

[redqueen]

131. Wow... what a stupid thing to say.

That's pretty shocking. Does he have a lot of fundie type constituents or something?

:shrug:

[Proud Liberal Dem]

138. Choice exists for behavior NOT orientation

I have always believed that we are all made up of a variety of genetic, social, and perhaps other factors and that nobody can really change who or what they are at the very core of their being. In terms of sexual orientation, I strongly believe that nobody can really control what "turns them on" or whether they find men, women, or both physically/romantically attractive. The only "choice" that any of us ever make and/or have full control over is our behavior, which, in terms of sexual orientation, means that we all can theoretically act (or choose NOT to act) on our feelings/desires but that behavior alone is not necessarily indicative of a person's tried and true sexual orientation. For instance, while many so-called "ex-gays" may have renounced engaging in same-sex activity and are now (supposedly) engaging solely in opposite-sex activity, it is highly doubtful that the actual sexual orientation of many (if any) of these individuals has changed, as evidenced by the seemingly high rate of what Sam Seder refers to as "EX-ex gays" in the "Ex-Gay" movement (reference: F.U.B.A.R.). Even if one were to successfully argue that being gay is a matter of "choice", in a free society like ours (is supposed to be), nobody should be discriminated against in any way because of the "choice" that they make in terms of their behavior/relationships UNLESS they are harming themselves or others in the process, something that nobody (outside of the realm of the religious right) has been able to argue in regards to GLBTQ individuals.

[Gelliebeans]

140. Isn't it amazing

that when these nominees say something completely wrong all of sudden the spin the next day was that they misunderstood the question or couldn't hear it to begin with.

Golly.. when Melissa asked the question, she even clarified it for him after hearing his initial response.

He fucked it up pure and simple and no amount of spin is going to change that.

[mwb970]

142. Richardson lost my support in 20 seconds.

I've sent several contributions to his campaign, but it's all over now. He stammered and stuttered through what should have been an easy, no-brainer answer. I did not feel like I was watching a president.

[Madspirit]

152. Orientation is not about just about orgasms

I'm a lesbian, not bisexual but I've had sex with guys lots of times. When I'm single, which I haven't been in 15 years, I tend to be "active" and men tend to be easy, no insult intended...and it's fine.

I also have sex with Rosie and her sisters and it's fine. It's much better with women but it's not about the sex per se. Orgasms are easy. It's about who you want to snuggle down with afterward. I can feel sexual with many. I can ONLY feel romantic with women. For me, that determines how I define myself. I am 53 and have never felt romantic toward any man, even ones I care deeply for and can have good sex with. Afterward it's just.."go sleep on the couch now". Men are just buddies and buddy fucking is fine...on occasion...but it's not what makes me what I am. THAT would be the love and the romance and the tender feelings and the GREAT sex and I only have ALL that with women.

...and I can only speak for myself.

Lee

[Nikia]

153. Sexuality is not a choice

Although choosing behavior is easier for some than others. For example, some people who are bisexual and are pressured by their family/religion/or other important people and institutes in their life may be able to adapt to entering into a monagamous relationships with people of the opposite sex without a lot of mental anguish or regret.
In college, however, I did not a number of people who were homosexual who really did want to live as heterosexuals because of pressure from their family/religion/ and other important people and institutes in their life and suffered a lot. Their opposite sex SOs suffered as well when the person admitted that they could not continue the relationship or didn't want to have sex with them because they were really gay. For them, homosexual behavior certainly wasn't a choice because they would have chosen to live straight if they weren't strongly oriented towards homosexuality.
I do agree that no one should condemn those who are bisexual, who could theoretically live as straight. I often think that many of the people who really believe that sexuality is a choice are bisexuals to some degree and may feel some bitterness about their choice to live as completely straight.

[bobbolink]

157. NOw, maybe some will see the sleeezy side of Richardson.

Or, not....

:(