Is John Edwards against civil unions?

NOT trying to start a flame war here--

I was flipping through channels this afternoon and landed on Faux News, which was doing a package report on the Dem candidates. When Edwards flashed on the screen, the caption read: Edwards is against civil unions. Is this true? I am pretty sure he is against "gay marriage," but I didn't know he was also against civil unions. I checked on his website, but couldn't find a definitive answer. He's my third choice right now (far behind Dean and close to Clark), so I just want a bit more info on this point. Of course, it could be the Fuax news is just lying again, but maybe not.

Thanks for the help.

if he were the governor.

States have control over their marital laws. The Federal Gov't recognizes marriage as a trigger for certain rights. Edwards said today on Meet the Whores, that he is for the Federal Gov't extending all the privileges and rights it grants and recognizes in relation to married people to same sex couples. I.e., he's for the federal gov't recognizing a CU as the equivalent of a marriage. He said it's up to each state to decide whether it wants to recognize gay marriages.

It's a great statement, and perfectly appropriate and totally liberal for a person running for federal office.

The hard question -- and were about to see if AP has influence in the world of politics -- is to ask him if he'd appoint SC justices willing to extend Full Faith and Credit to gay marriages. I think that's about the hardest question you could ask someone who is separating the federal and state authority on this issue./

All say that states should decide on civil unions. All against gay marriage. All for ENDA, all for partnership benefits, all for adoption rights, all for hate crimes legislation that includes sexual orientation.

THIS IS A FALSE ISSUE AND A MISLEADING THREAD NAME!

I had the same impression as FOX did but looking at the actual transcript I am not totally sure now. Here is the relevant part.

MR. RUSSERT: Governor Dean may have a difference with you on the issue of civil unions for gay couples. This is The Nation magazine. “Edwards’ campaign says”—”though he endorses gay adoption he has reservations about civil unions for gays and lesbians and would leave decisions on this matter to the states. His press secretary noted, ‘It’s an issue he thinks the country—and North Carolina—is not ready for.’” Why not?

SEN. EDWARDS: I think that the issue of civil unions is one that should be decided by individual states. I think that’s the natural way that that decision would be made. Having said that, I think it’s also very important for the president of the United States to make clear that everybody who lives in this country is entitled to equality, including gays and lesbians and those involved in committed gay and lesbian relationships, which means we should have partnership benefits. It means we should end discrimination in the workplace, which we still have not done. We should do something about—I think that just made reference to it—something about our adoption law, something about our immigration laws. I think the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy of the military is something that clearly needs to be revisited with our military leaders. Now, I think it’s important for us to make clear to people in this country that we welcome all of them.

MR. RUSSERT: If a gay couple goes to Canada and is married legally and returns to the United States, should that marriage be honored here?

SEN. EDWARDS: Again, I think this is a decision that has to be made on a state—individual states have to make that decision and...

MR. RUSSERT: If you were governor of a state, would you be supportive of that?

SEN. EDWARDS: No, I would not.

MR. RUSSERT: You would not. Why?

SEN. EDWARDS: I would not. Because, well, first of all, you probably know this, I just went through my discussion of what rights I think need to be given to gays and lesbians, those in committed gay and lesbian relationships, but I don’t support gay marriage.

MR. RUSSERT: Should states also have the right to set laws on abortion or gun control? If you’re going to say for civil unions, why not abortion, why not gun control, allow states to make that decision?

SEN. EDWARDS: Because I think this is a different kind of issue. I think this is an issue that individual parts of the country have different perspectives on. And I think the logical thing to do is to allow the states to do it, which I believe, by the way, is also Governor Dean’s position.

MR. RUSSERT: But don’t individual states have different views on abortion and gun control?

SEN. EDWARDS: Yeah, but there are some issues—and gun control as an example —we have guns traveling across state lines. They contribute to crime or don’t contribute to crime depending on your perspective, and I think these are issues that ought to be dealt with at the national level.

These are all the questions on civil unions or gay marriage in the interview. The problem is that Russert moved the goalpost on one of the questions. Then he compounded the problem by switching back again. Edwards did literally say only that he opposed gay marriage and not civil unions. I can see how a quick or even not so quick listen or read could see an implication of his opposing civil unions too. I wish Russert had directly asked him that but he didn't. I think I am not the only gay or lesbian voter who would like to see a clarification on this. I will check his HRC questionaire and see if I get one there.


Link to the whole transcript these are around 3/4 of the way down.

Oops here is the link.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/990963.asp?0dm=V219V

I just got done looking and he hadn't filled out a questionaire or at least hadn't filled out that section. They have no answers for him at all. So again I am waiting for clarification.

civil unions bill. So he's better on this than Dean. He just hasn't come out fo gay marriage.

Not only should you have watched the program before you commented I posted directly from the transcript. Here is his crystal clear, unambiguous answer about who should decide the issue of civil unions (btw this is from post 3)

SEN. EDWARDS: I think that the issue of civil unions is one that should be decided by individual states. I think that’s the natural way that that decision would be made. Having said that, I think it’s also very important for the president of the United States to make clear that everybody who lives in this country is entitled to equality, including gays and lesbians and those involved in committed gay and lesbian relationships, which means we should have partnership benefits. It means we should end discrimination in the workplace, which we still have not done. We should do something about—I think that just made reference to it—something about our adoption law, something about our immigration laws. I think the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy of the military is something that clearly needs to be revisited with our military leaders. Now, I think it’s important for us to make clear to people in this country that we welcome all of them.

end of quote

Note the bold, underlined, and italized first sentence of his very first answer on this issue. It is 180 degrees opposed to what you said. You are also, unsurpisingly, utterly wrong on Dean's position. He is, as he stated on Larry King Live, in favor of forcing states to recognize gay relationships but would leave it up to them to decide what to call that recognition.

Again...Edwards is from the South and know what it is going to take to win an election in 2004....now do you democrats want to beat George Bush. Or is it more important that you push your favorite candidates???Better be thinking along that line....Edwards is for liberty and freedom for every american...He is for civil unions.. in his state...and even then that is a liberal statement for the state of North Carolina