Can someone PLEASE tell me what John Kerry's position on Gay marriage is?

[Right_Mom]

I listened to some of the democratic presidential candidate debate last night and have been listening to Glenn Beck make fun of it this morning. John Kerry can't seem to nail down what exactly his position is on gay marriage. Does anyone know what it is? Also, does anyone out their have the D.C. phone number to his office? I am curious to hear what his office says his position is.

[homeland_maturity]

He's for "states rights," whatever that means. He knows he'll get broadsided by his base if he comes out strongly against it. But I agree with him on one point: it's not the biggest issue in America. It is a distraction at best.

[Right_Mom]

Yeah but he voted against Clinton's 1996 Protection of Marriage Act which gives the States the right to recognize or not anything other than a marriage between a man and a woman.

I agree that this is not the biggest issue facing us today, by far. But we have to react when a couple of activist judges make it an issue. I am wondering when the press will ask him to clarify his position and this and many other issues to which he seems to be on both sides of like the Iraq war, the Iraeli-Palestian conflict, NAFTA and probably many more.

[roylene]

I beg to disagree - he is for homosexual marriage and he is against it.

[Right_Mom]

Yeah, and if there is a third position he would take that one too.

[barkingdog]

It's obvious where he stands. He is left of the subject matters Conservative position. Now, there is an exception. That is when the subject matter comes in the form of a centrist position. He could then present himself as one. This exception can only be used however if he is very sure that that centrist position could never be construed to look Conservative.
Now if this sounds like gobledegoup, It must be a Kerry quote.

[KFriedConserv]

Its the same as Dick Cheney's.

[So Cal Rocket]

July 12, 2002

Members of the Massachusetts Legislature
State House
Boston, Massachusetts 02133

Dear Legislative Colleague,

We rarely comment on issues that are wholly within the jurisdiction of the General Court, but there are occasions when matters pending before you are of such significance to all residents of the Commonwealth that we think it appropriate for us to express our opinion.

One such matter is the proposed Constitutional amendment that would prohibit or seriously inhibit any legal recognition whatsoever of same-sex relationships. We believe it would be a grave error for Massachusetts to enshrine in our Constitution a provision, which would have such a negative effect on so many of our fellow residents. We in Massachusetts are justly proud of our Constitution, one of the first documents on this continent to set forward a system of self-government, which has not only served us well, but has been a model for others. The proposal to add to that document -- essentially a charter of liberty and democracy -- a provision as harsh both in its intent and its effect on our gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered constituents is in conflict with the generous spirit that motivated its adoption, and that should continue to govern us today.

In addition, as legislators, we believe it would be a terrible mistake to write into our Constitution so sweeping a proposal with the likelihood that it will prevent not only the state government, but also the cities, towns and counties from acting as they might wish to provide some form of recognition for same-sex relationships. We are therefore united in urging you to reject this Constitutional amendment and avoid stigmatizing so many of our fellow citizens who do not deserve to be treated in such a manner.

Senator Kennedy
Senator Kerry
Representative Markey
Representative Frank
Represenative Neal
Representative McGovern
Representative Olver
Representative Meehan
Representative Tierney
Representative Delahunt
Representative Capuano
Representative Lynch

[Right_Mom]

Thanks, you're the bomb.

[The Old Hoosier]

As with all issues, John Kerry is on both sides.

[BackInBlack]

Kerry's position, now, is actually kind of clear. It's that he personally opposes gay marriage (probably a lie, but it's his position) but wants to leave it up to the states -- and if the states want to reject their own activist courts through amending state constitutions, that's their business, not the federal government's. Theoretically, that was also Bush's position in 2000.

The contradiction comes in when you talk about Kerry's 1996 vote against the Defense of Marriage Act. He will not say whether or not he disavows that decision -- he just says that it's the law of the land and not up for a re-vote. So obviously he's lying about how he really feels (that's politics), but his position, at least as far as its relevant now, is fairly clear.

I'm wondering what people think about conservative columnists like Andrew Sullivan and David Brooks who say that we as conservatives should not only support gay marriage, but insist on it. After all, if we're worried about the harmful moral effects of promiscuity -- not to mention the physical effects of STDs -- shouldn't we support anything that encourages commitment, both among gays and straights?

Homosexuality is not going away; gays are getting together regardless of whether they get to marry. The only question is, will they be encouraged to leave the culture of contingency and join the culture of commitment?

[mysonsfuture]

Like Clinton and the rest of the power mad kool-aid drinkers, he says what he thinks people want to hear while attempting to alienate as few as possible. Thus, he is of course both for it and against it at the same time depending on which audience he is currently pandering to. To the dems primary voters he stresses his new found states rights religion (of course not for anything like 12 year old abortions without parental consent)and then to the "independents" he can say he would personally oppose gay marriage which is likely a complete lie. Same old same old. This country is in deep trouble.

[Abram]

His position is...wait, let's take a poll. Who are we talking too? "Okay, I definitively state that my position is.. hurmapmh, yes, that is my position. Thanks for your support."

Another simple question...has anyone noticed that the Party that claims to be so great about civil rights, equality, and the like has not nominated an African-American, Mexican-American, Asian-American, before for national office? The closest they will get is if they offer the nomination to Bill Richardson (half-Mexican), but he has told the party that he is going to refuse the nomination (depends if he changes his mind or not). Were were the serious African-American candidates (Sharpon and CMB don't count)? Where were the Asian, Hispanic, etc. We are going to have two white men vs. two white men in this election again and the Democrat party is going to demand minority support unanimously. Sorry...I am one minority supporting the President GWB. Go President Bush!!!!

[Jack Armstrong]

Can someone PLEASE tell me what John Kerry's position on Gay marriage is?

I would have to say John Kerry's position is ...
Slightly to the REAR!

[overeasy]

Ouch! BTW, I own the rights to the URL...

GayMarriageIsWrong.com

If anyone is interested, look for the sites for sale at http://www.sedo.co.uk.
Hope it does someone some good...!

Overeasy

[Paleo Conservative]

He says he is against it, but he has opposed all federal and Massachussets state legislation that defines marriage as being between one man and one woman. Therefore he is really for gay marriage.

[Jim Robinson]

What day is it?

[Starcutter]

In my opinion, John Kerry wants to take both sides of every issue. This is a man with no credible authority on any of this campaign's topics.. He has waffled, flip-flopped and just plain lied almost every time I have seen him speak.

Did you hear him stumble the other day when he was asked if he believed GOD was on America's side?

I must say that if this is the best the Dems have to go agaisnt Bush they will be severly beaten in November. My guess is Bush will win by more than 10 points....

[Always Right]

It's quite simple. Kerry is against gay marriage. But he considered the federal government wanting to limit marriage as between a man and a woman as 'hateful' and compared the defense of marriage act as the same as banning interracial marriages. So it is bigoted for the federal government to ban gay marriage. However, Kerry does support states banning gay marriage. So to sum up Kerry's position:

1. Bigoted for feds to ban gay marriage.
2. But, OK for states to ban gay marriage.

Get it?

[Always Right]

He says he is against it, but he has opposed all federal and Massachussets state legislation that defines marriage as being between one man and one woman.

Kerry supports Massachussets adopting a Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, but provided it allows civil unions. This is what makes Kerry's position so great. See my post #19.