Clinton, Obama, Or Edwards

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Poll question: Clinton, Obama, Or Edwards

Which candidates' positions are most in harmony with the positions of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered voters?

[AzDar]

1. Keeek..

:kick:

[phen43]

2. I voted - how 'bout you?

:hi:

[polichick]

3. Wait a minute...

Isn't Edwards the one who's so conflicted about gays that he doesn't think they should be able to get married?

[PurityOfEssence]

4. No, he's just one of the three who is

He's also the first to have gone on the record for supporting all legal rights attendant to the institution.

[polichick]

5. Are the other two less progressive on this issue?

Sorry, I've lost track.

(imo gays should have all rights AND be able to get married.)

[IndianaGreen]

8. True about Edwards, but it is also true that Obama cavorts with homophobes

Obama is to the right of his denomination which supports marriage rights for gays.

[AtomicKitten]

24. "cavorts with homophobes"

:eyes:

Exaggerated rhetoric fuels your outrage, but you probably already know that.

[dragonlady]

6. Edwards is most in harmony with the majority of Americans on the issues

and GLBT Americans are pretty much like other Americans.

[IntravenousDemilo]

7. Depends which one favours total equality of marriage (gay or un-gay), including the term itself.

Or in other words, is one of the above ready to treat homosexuals as not second-class citizens? You know, we've got to have the word "marriage" as well or else it's apartheid.

[terrya]

9. All three oppose same-sex marriage.

Obama, Clinton and Edwards all oppose same-sex marriage. All 3 say they support civil unions. All three say that are in favor of GLBT equality. All three are in the curious situation of saying that they are in favor of equality, but yet against same-sex marriage...thus, equality. Such is catering to the GLBT community in American Presidential politics today. And I could comment on the sad state of affairs of a major Democratic Presidential campaign hiring a religious person known for homophobic views for a political fundraiser, but I won't.

SHMILY

[DemocratSinceBirth]

15. I Tend To Agree

None of them can articulate a very good reason for opposing gay marriage... It's the pro-choice argument turned on its head...Most Dems , including myself, are personally opposed to abortion but believe it's fundamentally a matter of conscience and shold be left to the individual... I believe most Democratic office seekers are personally in favor of same sex marrage but oppose it as a matter of policy because it will cost them more votes than it will gain them... It's a dilemma...

[terrya]

16. How about simply recognizing that the support isn't there yet?

And say that they are ultimately in favor of same-sex marriage? We all know that American opinion isn't there right now for same-sex marriage? I do. I'm not deluded about that. But attitudes are slowly changing. A majority of 18 - 24 year olds support same-sex marriage.

Same-sex marriage will eventually happen in the United States. In all 50 states. It's going to take some time...hell, marriage equality in Idaho ain't happening anytime soon, that's for sure. But how about candidates recognizing that poltical realism and say that they are ultimately for same-sex marriage? A lot of GLBT people could be comfortable with that. And I think the Democratic Party should include something like that in the party platform.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

17. That's The Reason

Support isn't there yet... But if they admit to that they come off as looking craven ...I have no doubt that if any of the big three came out for gay marriage that would be the defining issue for 2008 and the Rethuglicans would use it to their benefit as they did in 2004 by putting anti same sex marriage amendaments on the ballot in eleven states to motivate their homophobic base...

[zalinda]

18. In essence that is what Edwards said

He said he is for civil unions but that because of his faith he doesn't support gay marriage, but that he's working on it. The word marriage is the stickler for most people, I don't know why.

zalinda

[polichick]

20. But "leaders" are supposed to lead...

...not hold wet fingers up to see which way the wind is blowing. Fearless leadership is especially important when it comes to civil rights issues imo.

[IntravenousDemilo]

21. If it will be a good idea 25 years from now, it's a good idea now.

A good idea is a good idea. There wasn't necessarily overwhelming support for it in Canada either, but we did it anyway because discrimination is unconstitutional and we left the decision to people with legal and constitutional expertise, i.e., the legal system including the Supreme Court, rather than to non-expert parliamentarians.

Perhaps those who don't believe in equal civil rights for all shouldn't be allowed to vote.

[terrya]

22. The ideal situation would be for the courts to decide down here.

Unfortunately, I don't trust OUR Supreme Court on same-sex marriage. I think the way to go would be for a gay or lesbian couple (or couples) to sue to have the "Defense of Marriage Act" unconstitutional...which, while I'm not a legal expert, I absolutely see as unconstitutional. That would then give a legal opinion on same-sex marriage. But with the makeup of our Supreme Court, I'm not so sure it would go in our favor. Justice Kennedy would be a swing vote...but I'm not sure how he would rule on a case like this.

Same-sex marriage IS a good idea. There are no reasons to oppose it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. Canada Is A Much More Liberal And Secular Society

Prostitution and marijuana is legal there...There are 435 Congressional districts in the U.S. A person that advocated the legalization of both would probably lose in more than four hundred of them...

[IntravenousDemilo]

28. The US could be too, if it tried hard enough.

Actually, marijuana isn't legal here. It was for a few months during the summer back either three or four years ago (can't remember which year because marijuana was legal at the time) after the Supreme Court ruled that the current law was unconstitutional on the grounds of its undermining the "security of the person" rights of people who needed medical marijuana, and the government hadn't come up with a suitable law within the twelve months the Supremes gave them to do so. However, they did come up with one after that, so mary-jane for you and me is illegal again, but now that too is being challenged in the Supreme Court as an equality issue because it discriminates against healthy people in favour of people who use medical marijuana. I wish them luck.

As for prostitution, it's never been technically illegal for the sex-trade workers themselves, but you're in trouble if you're a pimp or a john. And it's illegal to run a house of prostitution.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

30. That's How It Is In Israel

Prostitution is legal but pimping is illegal...I assume the theory behind it is that the only person that should live off the proceeds of prostitution is the one that actually does the work...

[IntravenousDemilo]

19. Then I guess it's none of the above.

shmily

[iverglas]

23. you intermeddling Canuckistanian you

You don't even get to pick.

idiotfacegoofythingy

[IntravenousDemilo]

29. Yeah, but I have a Yankee boyfriend.

And I should get to pick, and even vote, because I paid enough fucking US taxes after Jeopardy! No taxation without representation!!!

[Adelante]

10. They are about the same nt

[phen43]

12. I think they are about the same too

[Colobo]

11. Gobama!

[phen43]

13. FIRED UP!!

:woohoo:

[jonnyblitz]

14. yeah, go away bama.

:D

[Bluebear]

26. Gobama for including bigots as part of a campaign strategy!

[slick8790]

25. Depends on how you mean.

I'd say most GLBT voters are just like a lot of other Americans, their sexuality excluded. Since none of the top 3 support gay marraige, I voted John Edwards, since I think he's more in harmony with America as a whole, the GLBT community included.