Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Republican Bloomberg Said to Want State to Legalize Same-Sex Marriages

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 05:06 AM
Original message
Republican Bloomberg Said to Want State to Legalize Same-Sex Marriages
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/06/nyregion/06GAY.html?ex=1079154000&en=4b5e126812f235de&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who has refused in his two years in office to disclose his personal views on gay and lesbian marriage, told 80 journalists at a lesbian and gay fund-raising dinner in Manhattan Thursday night that he favored changing state law to legalize same-sex unions, four people who were there said yesterday.

On a day when the struggle for gay and lesbian marriage rights in New York moved into the courts with the first of many anticipated lawsuits and into the streets with auto caravans and protests on Long Island, the mayor of an upstate community said he would temporarily suspend his performing of same-sex marriages and Gov. George E. Pataki vowed again to uphold the existing marriage law.

But it was Mr. Bloomberg who was caught in the day's spotlight, although reluctantly. The mayor, who has a long record of supporting civil rights for gays but has resisted voicing personal opinions that might alienate his conservative supporters, has been under intense pressure to make his views known as the campaign for gay and lesbian marriage rights has blossomed in New York in recent weeks.

But he had steadfastly resisted the entreaties until Thursday night, and many who heard him speak at a $1,000-a-plate dinner of the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association were surprised to hear him say he favored a change in the law.

more

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
lcordero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 05:08 AM
Response to Original message
1. I knew that he wasn't a Republican
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DinahMoeHum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. He's indeed a RINO. He had been a life-long Democrat before running
for Mayor.

But if things really get tough for him, somehow, I doubt if the Dems will want him back in their fold.

The asshole is trying to have it both ways.


:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mobuto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I don't understand why he's so unpopular
he's not a great politician, fine, but he's been a good mayor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. I read just yesterday that locally many were unhappy with
the NYC hosting of the GOP convention - especially with the use of 9-11 as as political backdrop. Story seemed to indicate that Bloomberg was in a tough situation - but was continuing to sell the benefits in terms of tourist dollars brought to NYC as a result of the convention.

A small piece of me wonders - since he did this very publically (80 reporters) after reportedly staying 'mum' on the issue, if he is quietly telling the GOP hardliners to f#$k themselves and perhaps set off a controversy where there is a scramble to move the convention elsewhere. I doubt it - as the timing is so late and the loss of the $$ due to the convention would be big - but none the less, he has to know that this will create huge controversies within the current powerbase (the religious right voters) who have been empowered by today's GOP.

He sees the problems brewing in California (some republicans calling for the arrest of Mayor Newsome), hears the rhetoric from the rw talking heads in NYC, he has to know this would result in calls to boycott, etc. I mean he isn't just saying he has no stand, or that he personally is okay with Gay Marriage but follows the current laws, he appears to be advocating changing the law to accept civil unions.

Then again - this could simply be an indicator of the new direction - that the debate has forced what was considered a few years ago to be taboo (consider the outrage in Vermont) - to legalize civil unions - has now become the compromise ground. That, in a very short time, is a very interesting development.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 12:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC