Clark and Kerry are warming my heart on GLBT issues...

Wow :)

A lot of rhetoric, but no word on changing
the current status quo.

Kerry's been down on this for years, and Vermont was a progressive state long before Dean got there.

This is an issue that simply doesn't have popular support...yet. I saw a poll somewhere that said something like 40% of the nation approves of same sex unions, which is really quite encouraging since I would have thought it would be less. But none the less, you still don't have a majority supporting it, so to run on it as an issue would be stupid.

....GLBT issues are at the forefront of living in a free and equal society. Also, a majority of Americans support same-sex civil rights, which is not the same as supporting same-sex unions. (http://www.hrc.org/newsreleases/2003/030515gallup.asp)
GBLT rights is a necessary extension of civil rights based on race or gender....these movements were certainly not "in the majority" when they began.
Finally, I thought a vital component of a democracy was ensuring the rights of the minority even in the face of a majority.

Kerry didn't have time to mention it, but I have to add that in 1996 he was one of only 14 Senators, and the only one up for re-election, who voted against the blatantly anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act. To me, this is one of his most impressive votes.

in the Senate in 1985, and put up legislation BY HIMSELF, because others wouldn't sign on. Then he advocated for gays to serve openly in the military, and worked on the Hate Crimes bill. He really has the best and the LONGEST record on gay issues, yet Dean got all the publicity for the bill he signed in 2000. It was early work done by lawmakers like Kerry who paved the way and made it easier for future actions.

Very interesting...

I only trust Dean, Clark, Kerry, and Kucinich on these issues.

It seems many have some preconceived notion that Kerry is a centrist, when he has one of the most progressive records in Congress.

They tend to fare poorly in presidential elections and that whole Patriot Act thing...

Kerry's not too bad it seems though.

when he testified before Congress advocating for that policy. People should know these things because back then it wasn't too often that politicians or military men stuck their necks out for gays.

Human Rights Campaign has a great page for voters with candidate questionnaires, and their presidential forum online.

Also see this candidate guide put out by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. Braun agreed with the NGLTF on all eleven issues.

I did not know that either.

It does a lot to raise Kerry in my eyes, especially as I was having some real waffling on him before. Dean/Kerry? Kerry/Clark? Any mixture of the three Im happy with, or with Reverend Sharpton. His eloquence is astounding. :)

In the end, Im voting for whoever we put forward. ABB '04!

from Kerry's good record on advocating for gays.
Let's separate our anger out huh...

Heck, any of them would be better for GLBTs and for all Americans.. and for the entire world. They'll all help us make strides in getting equal protection of the law, which is all we really want. They'll all put-up Supreme Court nominees far superior to those of Bush. Which means that my primary decision will really come down to.. electability.

You should do more checking on all the candidates.

Subject: Mozambique

Message: Discuss

"They gave me an honorable discharge for killing a man, they gave me a dishonorable dischrage for loving another man" That moved my friend nearly to tears, I agree it was sad and rather beautiful in the sense.

the rest you got right. ;)

Whatever it was, my friend really liked it. It seems beautiful to me though. I saw some of all them speaking, and I have to tell you the truth, Kerry impressed me, he really did.

"They gave me a medal for killing a man. Then they gave me a dishonorable discharge for loving one."

Great quote, and it almost had me in tears as well. Kerry showed me he really does care, as did Clark. Really, I feel much better about all the candidates after tonight's debate.

who said that. :hi:

Unless I missed it. It doesn't really bother me too much because, like I said in a post above, it isn't an issue that is ripe to be addressed head on yet (though inrodes can and should be made). Still, it was interesting that he was silent on it, especially because a few months ago he said that he didn't support same sex unions.

"isn't an issue ripe to be addressed yet"????

You are obviously not GLBT, or must not have any GLBT friends, or you would feel differently.

why would anyone worry about what you do in private?

not about sex.

"why would anyone worry about what you do in private?"

Why did Bush constantly feature his lover and sex-partner in his campaign? Why at the Republican Convention did Bush announce that his marriage (civil union) to his opposite-sex lover, Laura, was the most important decision in his life? Why whey appearing with Arnold in California did Bush reveal his private sexual life by joking what he has in common with Arnold and saying "We both married well". The fact is that heterosexuality has NEVER EVER been a private issue. So to be consistent, sexual orientation is NOT a private issue. Yes, of course private sexual behavior and activity have always been private, but not orientation any more than eye color. The half of the human race that one is romantically attracted to is not something to be ashamed of or disquise. In fact I agree with Bush that it is one of the most important things in our lives that contributes to our character. The right-wing freaks only suddenly consider it private when they want to shut down, alienate, and marginalize gay people.

I am sick and tired of the notion that it's OK to be gay as long as you don't "flaunt it" in front of others. This is absurd, insulting, and blatantly discriminatory. Heterosexuals are NEVER advised to hide their love or affection (unless one is having an affair, but that's another thread).
What will it take for people to realize that same-sex couples want the same things out of life as a "normal" (read) heterosexual couples? Work, play, eat, sleep, contribute to society, perhaps raise some young'ens.

for many issues for a long time.

that is no lie :)

And Clark has had to deal with Gay Issues himself throughout his career.

He said a month or two ago that he believes marriage is for a man and a woman only. Has he changed his mind?

He doesn't think that since marriage is mostly done in churches that it should be part of the debate. It opens up a whole can of worms that just aren't necessary at this point in the debate. That's why he is squarely behind civil unions and always has been.