LBT
-=-=-
Posted on 08/07/2004 9:34:39 AM PDT by jveritas
John Kerry said in an interview that he would have backed the gay marriage ban amendment that passed last Tuesday Agu/3/04 in Missouri by overwhelming majority. He said he is against a "Federal" constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and that the Gay marriage issue should be addressed by "Individual States".
Again Kerry is lying to his teeth because he is not only against the Federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage but he is against the Individual State Legislature to interfere in banning gay marriage.
July 12 2002 John Kerry, Ted Kennedy and the other member of the Massachusetts Congressional Delegation signed a letter addressed to the Massachusetts Legislature asking them not to change the Massachusetts constitution to ban gay marriage.
Even the USA today has an article on February 12 2004 titled “Kerry signed letter backing gay marriage”. In this article the USA today refer to that even though Kerry is now saying that he opposes gay marriage an hints that he might support a limited ban, just signed a letter two years ago with other congressional colleagues urging the Massachusetts legislature to drop a constitutional amendment outlawing homosexual marriage.
The text of the letter will be found on MassEquality.org. The link is
http://www.massequality.org/html.
The USA today article on February 12th 2004 link is
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-02-11-kerry-gay-marriage_x.htm
The text of the letter:
Congressional Delegation united in opposition to proposed constitutional amendment discriminating on basis of sexual orientation
U.S. Congressmen Edward Markey and Barney Frank, on behalf of themselves, Senators Kennedy and Kerry, and Reps. Neal, McGovern, Olver, Meehan, Tierney, Delahunt, Capuano and Lynch, released a letter to every member of the Massachusetts State Legislature expressing opposition to the proposed State Constitutional amendment restricting legal recognition of same-sex relationships. The text of the letter, which was signed by all twelve members of the Congressional delegation and was delivered to the State House the morning of July 15, 2002, appears below:
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
"Democratic activists are working to ensure that the GLBT community has a visible presence both on the convention floor and within party leadership at this year's Democratic National Convention." (baywindows.com)As a freshman senator, Kerry sponsored the first gay equal rights legislation ever introduced in that body, the Civil Rights Amendments Act of 1985, which would have outlawed discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment, housing and credit. Kerry was one of only 14 senators who voted against the 1996 federal “defense of marriage” act, giving him a perfect Human Rights Campaign legislative score since 1995. (gaypeopleschronicle.com)
There is more information and sources on my web site dedicated to exposing Hillary.
re: Flip-Flop
Today, Kerry said he did approve of people having a pulse.
Last week, he opposed pulses.
"That is why he is toast." Not
A Republican can say "read my lips" and be toast.
A RAT cannot be toast under any condition because of the NYT, etc!
It is good to know the strength of your opponent but it is not good to overrate your opponent strength to the degree where you make him invincible in your mind.
bump
He was for homosexual marriage before he was against it.
How late am I? LOL!
Darn you FReepers are good! Great find!
You're right. There's no flip flop this time. What bothers me about this letter is he's taking away the right of the people of Massachusetts to vote on anything. What if they don't want homosexual unions, either?
Kerry was the one responsible for homosexual "rights"???
He started all this homosexual stuff going on in this country right now?????
If it weren't for Kerry, people wouldn't be waring in court to save marriage ?????
but Kerry assured us it's a "states right" issue!
It just doesn't matter to Democrats. It just doesn't matter. He can flip and flop 500 times a day and they will still vote for him. It's just about getting rid of W.
Bump! Hope the Bush campaign is gathering this ammo.
There is no difference.
There isn't really a political difference either. At least not in the version Kerry advocates, one that is completely equal both locally and federally. The only value of a different name is a functional value. It will prevent chaos when different states legislate differently. The difference is in the minds of the deceivers and those they manage to fool.
"Domestic Partners" is different in that it has even been used to allow any persons living together -- even non-sexually -- to attain insurance benefits from an employed domestic partner. Non married heterosexuals can do it. Non-sexual family members can do it (at least in some cases). It that situation, the public isn't forced to "recognize" a couple solely for their immoral relationship. there is no requirement to make it equal to marriage. Of course, the term could be redefined by the left, just like marriage, and come to mean the exact same thing as marriage and civil union.
good point. What business does Kerry have injecting himself into a state debate?
Take it easy on poor "Flipper" Kerry, he's had his eye on new "boy toy" John Edwards for years and he wants to make it permanent. He just doesn't know how to tell Tuh-ray-zuh yet.
In other words, John F*ckin' is a hypocrite on state's rights. This doesn't really surprise me - you have a guy who'll say different things to different audiences, depending on what he thinks will get him elected. Kerry and principle do not go together.
To know a Kerry position on any given issue, you must know both sides of the issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.