why should gays/lesbians abandon the Democratic Party ->

[msongs]

an interesting opinion piece by a member of the gay brotherhood:

"Where's the Party?" - does the DEM party really respect gays and lesbians?

WHAT - "Typically the Democratic Party is seen as the party of gays and lesbians. And I wonder why."

"Democrats are the party that gave us a presidential candidate saying he's against same-sex marriage while trying to say he's
for equality"

WHO - by Charles karel Bouley printed by IN Los Angeles, a gay bar type magazine. Karel is known as a dance music artist AND co-host of the first openly out gay interest radio talk show on KFI in Los Angeles with his former partner (now deceased, don't recall the name).
KFI also hosts Rush Limbaugh. Karel's show was on during PM drive time 5 days a week!

http://www.inlamag.com/915/columnists/karel.html

he does have a useful conclusion however.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[dsc]

1. He should bone up on his facts

DOMA was passed by a Republican Congress, not a Democratic one. That is a matter of public record. When Matthew Sheppard died, Republicans were in controll of Congress, not Democrats. When Katrina happened Republicans were in control of Congress, not Democrats. All again, matters of public record. He also is a bit hypocritical. He wants free speech for himself, accurately critiquing the current FCC, but then a few paragraphs later wants to evicerate the first amendment for people who preach hate.

He has some good points but his column is marred by horrid execution.

[peacebird]

2. As useless as the Dems have been - the Repukes are worse.

[Beelzebud]

3. One-issue voters piss me off....

No different from the anti-choice crowd...

[blm]

4. Barney Frank was against gay marriage then, too. And there is sound reason

for those who care about legislation to want to see it handled more effectively.

Marriage is also a SACRAMENT in many religions. It needs to be FIRST separated from its religious identity before it can fully advance as a civil institution.

That complication and nuance is difficult to put into a soundbite.

I assume Karel is ignorant of the fact that the Dem he mocks was also the FIRST senator to even put up legislation to protect gays and advocated for years for gays to serve openly in the military.

[dsc]

8. I find that a little hard to swallow

do you have a citation for Frank being against same sex marriage equality back in 1996?

[blm]

9. The OP was referring to 04 election and so was I.

I'm pretty sure I recall accurately that Frank opposed the way Gavin Newsome and others wanted to act without taking the smaller and more COMPLICATED legislative steps needed. The words "Too fast, too soon" come to mind. I'll track down an article as time permits.

It's not that legislators like Kerry and Frank are strictly opposed to gay marriage - they are NOT. They just know that it is going to take alot of untangling first and it needs to be done in steps.


There is some history to this position - and legislators who also practice their religious faith acknowledge the complexity and understand that it is going to take some untangling of religious "marriage" from its civil identity.

Why would you find that hard to swallow, given Frank's respect for the legislative process and the details involved in creating serious legislation?

[dsc]

14. With all due respect

that is a quite different thing than what you said. I agree that Frank was against what Newsome did but that isn't being against same sex marriage equality.

[blm]

16. It's said in context as an 04 Kerry campaign issue, just as OP writer did.

I stated it without specifics because I thought more people here at DU were aware of Frank's remarks and how Kerry has a more nuanced position than the writer allows in the essay quoted in the OP.

Fighting it in black and white is what GOPs do.

[dsc]

17. They certainly didn't have the same position on the Mass amendment

which is what royally pissed off many gays.

[blm]

18. The internet myth it became was like wildfire.

He answered a question about the gay marriage amendment for the Dem platform from a Boston reporter who attended Kerry's speech in a southern state. Kerry said that he didn't THINK there was enough support for it, and that he hadn't heard a strong enough press for it from the public.

Fair enough - the man had just been traveling around the country for two years and certainly didn't see alot of support for a gay marriage amendment.

Intenet distorters went to town making false claims about what happened - it turned into Kerry attacked gay marriage in a speech to pander to southern voters.

[dsc]

21. That just plain isn't what he said

I saw the original articles and they said he supported the amendment not that he thought the amendment would pass. Incidently, it turned out not to have even been brought to a vote, so his support comment turned out not to have been right either. Incidently he also flip flopped on the Missouri amendment first saying he would have voted for it, then saying, after being informed it also ended civil unions, that he would have voted against.

On edit here is a Washington Blade interview on the subject

Blade: I know you supported the Massachusetts amendment and it does provide for an alternative of civil unions.

Kerry: Correct.

Blade: But the Missouri initiative which just recently passed, and a number of those that are coming up this November — like Michigan, Ohio and others — are written such that they would eliminate even recognition or security through civil unions.

Kerry: Right.

Blade: I think in Missouri, you said after that vote that —

Kerry: I did. And I was not aware. I was unbriefed, and I thought it was the same amendment we had in Massachusetts. And that’s very simple.

I just thought it was a simple prohibition and not one that excluded civil unions. Obviously, it’d be inconsistent.

I am for civil unions and therefore I would not have voted for that had I been there. … I just didn’t know it went as far as it did and, obviously, I don’t support it.


After the interview, the Kerry campaign released a statement in the candidate’s name declining to say whether the actual effect of the Missouri ballot measure would have changed his position.

end of quote

http://www.washblade.com/2004/9-24/news/national/kerry.cfm

You can read the whole interview at the link provided and a lengthy discussion of groundrules and possible conflicts of interest with the reporter (though it should be noted that Kerry's campaign chose her)

[blm]

22. It was in the articles I saw. And the internet bull went just as described

There were dozens of threads here at DU that used internet articles and blog postings that completely distorted what Kerry said and the circumstances under which he made the comments.

As far as the other goes - are we talking about different matters?

[dsc]

23. Please read editted post

It has a link backing me up.

[blm]

24. I think the gay community should crap on Kerry completely, after all, he's

never lifted a finger for them. This issue is the ONLY issue. Anyone who looks to be careful with it and sees it as an issue that needs proper legislative steps can go fock themselves.

Basically, that's what it comes down to.

[dsc]

26. That isn't what I said

nor is it what the author of that piece said, though he is closer to that than I was. What I am saying is that he did indeed support those amendments and that supporting those amendments did hurt him in the gay community. I also think it didn't particularly help him with any other set of voters, though I can't prove that assertion. The author is clearly more toward what you are saying though he is also pissed at the party as a whole not standing up to DOMA, passing hate crimes legislation, and DADT. I tend not to agree with the author on those complaints and pointed out him being factually wrong in a couple of cases.

the bottom line is you overstated your case and that is what I was discussing in this minithread. Barney Frank and John Kerry didn't have the same position on gay marriage in 2004, which you stated they did. Like it or not, Kerry was politically stupid for supporting the MA and especially the MO amendment. Did it singlehandedly do him in? Likely no. But whomever our nominee is in 2008 needs to learn from that mistake. Be on one firm side of an issue like that. Be for one of the extreme positions and be consistant in that position. Just like he did on abortion.

[dsc]

25. No we're not

I specificly stated the Massachusetts amendment and you specificly said he didn't say he supported it. That is what I just got done posting. The gay community was way angrier over his support of the Massachusetts and Missouri amendments than over his refusual to back a federal gay marriage bill. Had he merely done that he wouldn't have had nearly the trouble he had getting gay votes.

[blm]

27. I was talking about the PLATFORM for Mass when Kerry said he didn't think

gay marriage represented the mindset of most Democrats in Mass. - not from what he saw - and thought it would be a mistake to make it part of the platform.

[dsc]

28. He may well believe that but most polls show him wrong

Unless Demcorats are actually less likely in MA to support marriage equality a majority of Democrats support it (since a majority of MA voters do). In any case, that was clearly not what I said in my post. I said, and have now sited, his support for a MA amendment which would have banned gay marriage while providing Civil Unions and for a MO amendment which would have banned gay marriage and was silent on civil unions. Those are what stuck in the craw of many in the gay community.

[blm]

11. Found a NYT article from 2004

post election.

This is the preview excerpt - you have to pay for the whole article, but this snippet makes my point that it's not about being against gay marriage for legal minds concerned with the task of writing it into exacting legislation, but how best to go about it in a slow, organized way that will be EFFECTIVE in the long run.

The issue was made into a black and white one and both sides engage on a black and white playing field. Thoughtful legislators get hammered by both sides for their nuanced positions.



*Please Note: Archive articles do not include photos, charts or graphics. More information.
December 9, 2004, Thursday
By JOHN M. BRODER; KATHARINE Q. SEELYE CONTRIBUTED REPORTING FOR THIS ARTICLE. (NYT); National Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section A, Page 1, Column 5, 1337 words

Correction Appended

DISPLAYING ABSTRACT - Leaders of gay rights movement are embroiled in bitter debate on whether they should moderate goals and demands in wake of bruising losses in November, when 11 states approved constittuional amendments banning same-sex marriages; Human Rights Campaign, largest gay-rights group, has accepted resignation of director and named first non-gay co-chairman, Democratic lobbyist Michael Berman, and adopted more moderate strategy with less emphasis on legalizing marriages and more on strengthening personal relationships; more aggressive advocates like Jonathan D Katz and George Chauncey see marriage right as key, while moderates warn about enabling right wing to mobilize public opinion as was done in November; Reprs Barney Frank and Tammy Baldwin, both gay, say movement must pick its fights and act more incrementally; Frank criticized San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom for 'spectacle weddings,' which were later invalidated by California Supreme Court

[cboy4]

5. I don't plan on abandoning shit. The Democratic Party is my family.....

I don't agree with everything, but I have relatives within my own family whom I don't agree with about everything.

Leave the party out of selfishness? Who do you think I am? Joe LIeberman? :eyes:

[ronnykmarshall]

6. We are fam-ily!!

We are family
I got all my sisters with me
We are family
Get up everybody and sing

We are family
I got all my sisters with me
We are family
Get up everybody and sing

Everyone can see we're together
As we walk on by
And we fly just like birds of a feather
I'm not telling no lie

All of the people around us to say
Can we be that close
Just let me state for the record
We're giving love in a family dose, yeah

CHORUS
We are family
I got all my sisters with me
We are family
Get up everybody and sing

We are family
I got all my sisters with me
We are family
Get up everybody and sing

Living life is fun and we've just begun
To get our share of the world's delights
High hopes we have for the future
And our goal's in sight
No we don't get depressed
Here's what we call our golden rule
Have faith in you and the things you do
You won't go wrong, oh no
This is our family Jewel, yeah

CHORUS

We are family
I got all my sisters with me
We are family
Get up everybody and sing

We are family
I got all my sisters with me
We are family
Get up everybody and sing

We are family
I got all my sisters with me
We are family
Get up everybody and sing

We are family
I got all my sisters with me
We are family
Get up everybody and sing

[cboy4]

7. We are family?? Who are you?

J/K!!!

:pals:

[LittleClarkie]

10. Are you asking the question or making the statement

I can't tell.

Are you saying

"Why should they leave?"
or
"Why they should leave"

[msongs]

12. Mr. Karel is of the opinion the dems have left the GLBT's in the lurch

by wanting GLBT votes then not giving GLBT's true equality, thus the dems have left the GLBTs, much like traditonal repubs have been left behind by the right wingers.

IMO its a matter of personal choice. If one is leaving, where does one go? Nowhere, the greens, liberarians?

In this case half a loaf is better than none. Maybe the rest of the loaf is available in a few years.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[FoxOnTheRun]

13. Bush is maybe bisexual, but he won't help you

[ikojo]

15. Claire McCaskill the Democratic Senatoral candidate

does not support marriage for gays and lesbians. So, both Senatorial candidates in MO are against gay marriage. Maybe stances such as that turn gays and lesbians away from the Democrats.



http://claireonline.com/news.jsp?key=2470&t=

snip

Although McCaskill has repeatedly said she believes marriage is between a man and a woman, Talent continues to hammer her for supporting gay marriage. Talent pledged to continue to fight for a gay marriage ban and issued this warning to his supporters:

[lies and propaganda]

19. I LOVE Karel!!!

I tuned in religiously, he is a beautiful, amazing man.

[Ioo]

20. Well The Dems have given little more than lip service to the community

Clinton signed the DOMA, and don't ask don't tell.