Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton may have a bit of trouble on their hands. Gay activists are putting more pressure on the Democratic candidates for less lackluster remarks on last week’s gay marriage ruling.
Lane Hudson of Faith In America took pen to virtual paper today to criticize Obama and Clinton of fearing fundamentalist blowback:
Our candidates, our politicians, our political parties all fear the pushback from the religious fundamentalists in America. They fear that criticism so much, that they lack the courage to take action that would invite that criticism. By doing so, our candidates make the fundamentalists stronger and perpetuate a society where gay and lesbian citizens remain at the back of the bus.
If the Democrats don’t grow a pair and revisit the issue, he says, they will have “failed” gay voters.
oakling
*coughs*
WILL HAVE failed gay voters?
M Shane
Gay people who care about the future of America should take action against selfish idiots like Lane Hudson who don’t realise that winning this election is of more importance than having their panties flown with the flag. There are polituical realities.One of them is not Hudson’s ignorant claim that losing an election will reduce the number of religious extremists.
Apart from his concern being more unimportant, there is a direct proportion between his posture and that of the Naderites.
The survival of the U.S is more important today than driving away questionable voters. Votes are votes.
Dumb queens like him are as mindless as any suberban housewife who thinks that the major issue of the election is how often her bridge club can meet.
What a dork! these are not times for petty recognitions that will put the country in the hands of Nazis. Then he won’t be able to whine in public, or at all.
Gregoire
I could really care less if candidates pander. Its what politicians do.
If West Virginia has taught us anything, its that some voters will vote on their basest and most backasswards prejudices. If Hill and Barack need to calibrate their response, well, I don’t like it, but there are so many bigger fish to fry — Iraq and the economy being two of them.
Brian Miller
Gay people who care about the future of America should take action against selfish idiots like Lane Hudson who don’t realise that winning this election is of more importance than having their panties flown with the flag.
Why must we “realise” (sic) this dubious contention?
We survived almost 8 years of arch conservative George W. Bush. In that time, civil unions appeared in Vermont and numerous other states, domestic partnerships emerged in California and NJ, the sodomy laws were stricken down by the Supreme Court, gay marriage was legalized in Massachusetts, and gay marriage was also legalized in California by a Supreme Court with a *REPUBLICAN* majority — including justices appointed by Ronald Reagan, of all people.
Is McCain, a moderate Republican on most issues, going to be worse than Bush? Not really.
While I reject both old parties and their failed policies, and find the desperate Democrats’ attempts to claim that winning the election is “paramount” to be particularly laughable. The Democrats have not earned the votes of LGBT people, and until they do, gay people are correct to withhold our votes and support. Period.
Lane Hudson
M Shane:
Thanks for your comments. I completely understand where you are coming from.
Faith in America doesn’t think that presidential candidates (or me) should be flying anybody’s panties with the flag. I promise.
We see this court ruling as a defining moment. When they happen, there is a unique opportunity to influence the way our issues are talked about. The CA Supreme Court’s thoughtful opinion contains so many enlightening ways that Obama, Clinton, and McCain could talk about the marriage issue rather than ignore it.
Too many times, we are winked at and asked to ‘just wait until after the election’. That has gotten us precious little. There is nothing that a candidate will promise AFTER an election that he or she didn’t promise BEFORE it to get elected. It’s an unfortunate reality and is why our movement is where it is today. We must ask more of our candidates in order to get more. That is what Faith in America has done on this issue.
With much respect-
Lane
foofyjim
While this election is certainly larger than our issue of marriage equality, I think the time has come for politicians with any amount of courage to have a serious conversation with the extreme religious right.
They need to be told they do not hold the exclusive right to morality in this country. They need to understand there are others, many others, who interpret the same religious texts in a different, more inclusive and loving manner. They further need to be made to understand what religious freedom means and that it includes the freedom to practice no religion as well.
ajax
M SHANE, do you have to try really hard to sound so ignorant and offensive, or does it just come naturally?
The California Supreme Court very rightly made a very strong connection between equality for all minorities and the issue of marriage equality. Mr. Lane jumps on the bus that the Supreme Court put in motion.
Mr. Lane did not say that losing an election would reduce the number of religious extremists. He said that pandering to religious extremeists falsely gives the impression that they wield more power than they actually do.
Channel your anger in a more construtive direction, please.
Brian Miller
I think the real issue is that some people want goodies from the government more than they want equality under the law. They’re willing to trade the civil and human rights of others for $1,000 “equalization payments” or a federal government monopoly health system.
Basically, they’re selling their fellow gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender citizens into second-class status in exchange for some pieces of cake for themselves. That’s not principled, nor moral.
CHURCHILL-Y
One thing is for sure, Obama won’t show any spine in defense of gay voters. He doesn’t even do it in his own camp:
http://www.obamameeksrecord.wordpress.com/
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/13/17299/3193
NObama!!!
John
Look, we know where they stand here, and they’re both far and away better than any republican. I’m happy to wait for a more forceful pronouncement of support for gay issues, if it means fewer anvils for the asshole republicans to use in an effort to stir up hatred and bigotry, potentially losing the dems the election.
A gay friendly president who chooses words carefully so as not to provide weapons to the other side is far better than a fearless pro gay politican whose lust for gay issues turns him/her unelectable.
McCain is worse. And there is enough at stake, that I’m content with the lesser of two evils.
david gabriel
IN THE GAY HANDBOOK IT SAYS THAT ALL GAYS MUST REGISTER AS DEMOCRATS AND MUST VOTE FOR DEMOCRATS.THEY CANNOT SUPPORT ANY OTHER PARTIES AS THEY ARE NOT MEMBERS OF THE US FREE NATION BUT THE DEMOCRAT VERSION OF THAT WHICH INCLUDES BENEFITS LIKE NOT TELLING….
THEY MAY EVEN BE PUNISHED FOR BEING MEMBERS OF GREEN PARTY,LIBERTARIAN PARTY,ETC
PAGE SIXTEEN OF GAY HANDBOOK,USA VERSION
david gabriel
ESP.WHEN YOU LEARN THAT BAD REPUBLICAN GOVERNORS APPOINTED ALL OF THOSE BAD JUDGES TO THE
CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT,EXCEPT ONE WAS APP’T BY A DEM.
CUZ THOSE REP FREAKS JUST MADE GAY MARRIAGE LEGAL,NOT SETTLING FOR DUM DUM DUMESTIC PARTNERS LIKE OTHER
DUM OCRAT STATES.. NOW STUCK WITH 2ND CLASS STAND.
Rayven Collins
I like David’s Gay Handbook comment, lmao. For me, I see no point in voting. Our votes don’t count. They can steer the electoral college to go one way but, they don’t have to.
I usually like democrats so I can definitely see where David is coming from but I think I might have considered having Ron Paul in office. I hate McCain. I wish that bitch would croak. Hilary is a bitch but she’s very determined and I think she could made some good changes, however, alot of things I don’t agree on. As with Obama, I just have a bad feeling about him but he’s okay.
All I care about right now is a president who has a good plan when it comes to Global Warming. Global issues and economic issues are more important to me than gay marriage right now. Seriously, what’s more important? Our lives or a piece of paper?
spg
This reminds me of the time when HRC used to be HRCF before Elizabeth Birch became director. Then, the the big controversy was about AIDS and then, as now, the politicians were either spooked by the public passions or saw an opportunity for advancement and of course, money.
As you may recall, a small group of Americans decided to exercise their First Amendment right to assemble and ACT-UP came into being. The response from the gay (we didn’t do “LGBT” yet) political experts was that “our people were out of control”.
and “that we were upsetting people”.
ACT-UP did many things, but most importantly, it taught our community a lesson on how to courageously stand up for itself in the very same manner that other groups and communities so routinely do. Since then we have learned to use the courts, the legislatures, and our resources and monies, and the law to achieve what other people have and we do not have.
We should not be surprised at the politicians’ fears and our disappointments at their lack of jubilation because every time we won somewhere big or small, it was the same – a hang dog, reluctant acknowledgment filled with metaphors and allegories. No, they do not love us because we are still that controversial and they hate controversy.
So here we are again. Oh dear, our people are out of control again simply because the people in California exercised their due process rights that are guaranteed in the Constitution. Now I ‘m fairly certian they knew we would be in the middle of a presidential campaign and mindful of large issues like the environment, the Middle East and all that. I don’t think these people were that that unaware, but they stood up and what I have learned all these years is that if we don’t stand up for ourselves, no one else will.
Charley
SPG, good point our activism is the way to make change and be heard, because the language of politicians don’t include gay issues. Robin Tyler was discouraged from bringing suit by the “safe” LGBT fundraising organizations. Had she not taken individual initiative we would not have the latest ruling on gay marriage in California today.
Obama said it, that we as gay people have to do it. Anotherwords, politicians can’t and won’t if they want to get elected.
The language of the recent court case gives “US” amunnition to build on, not candidates who would bring our enemies gifts if it meant votes..They don’t act in ethical ways when it comes to vote getting. It’s wrong, but that’s the way it is.
Mr C
There goes Churchill again.
Girl, Today is the big day for Kentucky to hand Hillary a win. So let it be. That word press link is so DAMN BOGUS. It’s obvious you don’t like Obama or any other Black individual and we really don’t give a fuck. So come Nov 4 just vote McCain and see how much he loves your Gay agenda.
PERIOD!
Brian Miller
It’s obvious you don’t like Obama or any other Black individual and we really don’t give a fuck. So come Nov 4 just vote McCain and see how much he loves your Gay agenda.
Ignoring the transparent race baiting, I can answer the question brought up in your latter question.
McCain loves the “Gay agenda” about as much as Obama. In that both have done nothing material to advance the equality of gay people under the law. Ever.
Mr C
And neither has Hillary. And if she has Brian please show me where she has.
And further more if you read some of Churchill’s posts on here they are very race-baiting
So I responded accordingly to him!
Thanks!
Jack va Staden
My sentiments exactly!