Clinton misstates wife’s DOMA position

[davidinalameda]

http://www.washblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=17268

ormer President Bill Clinton last week suggested his wife, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, would support repealing the full Defense of Marriage Act, an apparent change in position from Hillary Clinton’s previous position calling for repeal of just one part of the law.

But a Hillary Clinton campaign spokesperson told the Blade that President Clinton “misspoke” in the interview. “Hillary Clinton supports only the repeal of section 3 of DOMA,” campaign spokesperson Jin Chon said.

In an interview with student journalists at Tulane University in New Orleans, which was recorded by MTV, President Clinton said, “Hillary’s position is that she doesn’t support it and if we have the votes to repeal it, she’ll be happy to repeal it.”

In previous statements and position papers, Hillary Clinton, a U.S. senator from New York, has said she favors repealing only the section of DOMA that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. That section prevents same-sex couples joined by marriage in Massachusetts or by civil unions in three other states from receiving federal benefits and rights of marriage. Hillary Clinton has said she opposed repealing the clause in DOMA allowing states to refuse to recognize gay marriages from other states.


I had thought she had come around to support the full repeal but I guess not

How can any GLBT person or anyone who support full marriage equity support HIllary

even if Obama doesn't support marriage equity, he certainly doesn't support DOMA!

[LordJFT]

1. Hillary's position on DOMA sucks compared to Obama's and Edward's

And yet somehow some duers have it in her head that she's some big hero of the GLBT community.

[maddiejoan]

4. Obama's position on DOMA

Is an uneducated one --and will lead to a push for a Constitutional Ban if he is not careful with it.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0807/Obamas_and_DOMA.html

He clearly doesn't know the history or intricacies involved in this issue --and we'll all suffer for it.

[Umbram]

6. Obama taught Con Law, and you say he's uneducated on the issue?

I suppose the fact that you have a strong opinion is your only qualification to make that determination?

[Drachasor]

7. So wait...you're against same-sex marriage being recognized across State lines?

Even though the article doesn't really support that it would necessarily spread across State lines, and indeed it says most experts agree, I can only see that as cause for your worry that it would encourage a "constitutional ban".

Of course, I, and in fact most, find the idea pretty laughable that such an amendment would ever pass. First off, in a Democrat-controlled Congress it is unlikely to get any traction, secondly most Senators (including many Republicans) even today don't think that's an appropriate thing for the Constitution to cover. Additional, support for Gay Rights grows constantly, so each year it becomes less and less likely.

So, in short, I find your position bizarre, and I'd like you to explain it more.

[Stephanie]

2. Obama says all federal benefits and rights should apply to same-sex civil unions

Hillary has always weaseled on this issue.

[mac2]

3. Wishing don't make it so...Bill.

How about anyone can get a "Civil Union Contract" if they want in any state? It is required and honored everywhere.

If any church allows "marriage under god" between same sex or different...than they can call it "marriage" if they want. No state has to recognize any "marriage" but the "Civil Union Contract".

"Marriage" is a religious term and is not used as a legal document but one of god's and his church.

All "marriage certificates" prior to a certain date can be legal but not after. A "Civil Union Contract" is signed and witnessed at the government office. If a "marriage" is to take place, it can proceed in a religious place or home, etc. by said clergy.

If a couple (of same or different sex) decide one should work and the other stay home to care for children then the IRS can decide on tax benefits or not.

I personally prefer National Health Care then everyone regardless of sex or age can be covered.

[Catherina]

5. "only the repeal of section 3 of DOMA" Thanks. I was looking for this n/t