Kerry's gay conundrum

[AmericanErrorist]

If gay voters wanted a better champion than John Kerry, they'd have to invent him. The three-term senator boasts a near-perfect voting record on gay and AIDS-related causes, a record virtually unrivaled among national politicians.

Kerry has gone far beyond allies who vote with the community but risk little in doing so. He has sponsored federal gay rights legislation dating to 1985, when such stances were considered far more politically dangerous, and early HIV-prevention and treatment bills.

During the 1993 backlash against President Clinton's effort to lift the military ban on gay service members, Kerry faced down fellow Democratic senator Sam Nunn in riveting congressional testimony. And Kerry was one of only 14 senators to vote against the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

However, the Kerry-Edwards campaign has failed to catch fire among LGBT voters. In PlanetOut's August "Political Spectrum" survey of our readers, for instance, respondents repeatedly described him as the "lesser of two evils," and declared that they are far more motivated by disdain for President Bush's antipathy to gay equality than by Kerry's stellar record of leadership. They waxed nostalgic for President Clinton, who came into office with a far spottier record, and yearned for a serious third-party candidate.

All of which raises fundamental questions bedeviling the Kerry campaign: Why is a candidate with his record maligned in the very community he has supported? And why is he doing so little to counter this perception and rev up the gay vote?

The most obvious answer lies in the single burning issue that has vexed his campaign from the beginning: marriage, on which he has staked out confusing and contradictory stands.

On one hand, he opposes the Federal Marriage Amendment, championed by President Bush. On the other, he has sent mixed signals on statewide same-sex marriage bans on the November ballot in 10 states. (Missouri and Louisiana passed prohibitions earlier this year.)

When asked to clarify Kerry's position, campaign spokesman Jin Chon said, "John Kerry believes that marriage is an issue for states to decide. He does not support same-sex marriage, but he does support equal rights for gay couples. The best way to achieve those rights is through civil unions."

http://www.planetout.com/news/feature.html?sernum=963

[BayCityProgressive]

1. the marriage issue

was a backlash and that is why Bush pursued it. I am a gay democrat and it was very dissapointing to me. Bush knew he could rev up his base with this crap and at the same time marriage is too controversial for Kerry to endorse and he knew this would supress Kerrys support. Very good political move by Bush.

[LittleClarkie]

3. Remember Kerry is Catholic

Of course Bush is using this as a flip/flop, but I think that the gay community needs to remember that Bush is not a friend to them. Kerry can at least be worked with.

Kerry's stance isn't all that difficult to understand though.

He is against gay marriage (again, his Catholicism) but doesn't have a problem with civil unions. Just leave the church out of the equation, and he's cool. He is also for granting legal rights to gay partners, ie health care and such.

Is it a big issue for the average same-sex couple that it be a church wedding? Or will a justice of the peace work as well?

He is for a state's right to choose one way or the other, and not for a Constitutional Amendment which would force the states to accept a ban. Bush also claimed to be for a state's right to choose, until the states started choosing a result he didn't like.

Odd that Kerry would be more for state's rights than Bush. That should please a few Conservatives.

[Not Me]

2. Gay marriage is going to be a long road...

And it is going to involves courts all along the way. That is why it is so important not to allow bush* a second term to further pack the courts with RW ideologues.

Likely scenarios are going to be cases from MA testing DOMA. With a Kerry Attorney General, it will at least be heard...not so with Ashcroft.

And then there are going to be IRS challenges from gay couples legally married in US states as well as foreign countries where marriage is legal and otherwise recognised in the US.

Movement toward civil unions,if accompanied by true equal rights, will level the field somewhat and make lay a real foundation for a day when EQUAL=EQUAL. That is when the Supreme Court will be asked to weigh in on State Amendments contstitutionality. This is why new SCOTUS justices have to be moderate.

Kerry knows that. And I trust him.

[baltodemvet]

4. All the LGBT folks I know are solidly on board n/t

[Demoiselle]

5. I have a friend, Log Cabin Republican, who resigned convention....

He was a delegate, he said he couldn't support Bush ,planned to vote for Kerry. He made the wire services back during the RNC.

[CityHall]

6. Whoever gets to speak second wins

This is one of many issues in the debate where whoever gets to speak second wins. If a question goes to Kerry, Bush can respond and appear somewhat moderate, but question whether we really want marriage diluted, or some such thing, and he'll appeal to a lot of voters. But is Bush has too answer first, Kerry can paint him as a radical who's stirring up discrimination when the issue should really be left to the states. As usual, the two party system keeps niche views marginalized, however strongly held.