Hillary's statement in context

I also asked her about the comments by General Peter Pace that homosexulity is "immoral." Clinton has opposed the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military, so I asked her if that law -- signed by her husband in 1993 -- was a mistake, and if homosexuality is "immoral."

"General Pace has clarified his remarks, but let's not lose sight of the fact that 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell' is not working," she said. "We are being deprived of thousands of patriotic men and women who want to serve their country who are bringing skills into the armed services that we desparately need, like translation skills. And one can argue whether it was a good idea when it was first implemented, but we know have evidence as to the fact that we are in a time of war -- when we really need as many people as we can to recruit and retain in an all-volunteer army -- we are turning people away or discharging them not because of what they've done but because of who they are."

But is it immoral?

"Well I'm going to leave that to others to conclude," she said. "I'm very proud of the gays and lesbians I know who perform work that is essential to our country, who want to serve their country and I want make sure they can."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2007/03/senator_clinton.html

NO it is not fucking immoral.

Without saying the word "fucking," is that so damned hard?

I am so tired of watching public figures pirouette around issues that any fool can see are issues of equal treatment and toleration of continued bigotry.

You want to be on the side that's always winning. Reminds me of Mr. Tate in Bewitched.

I have NEVER heard anyone reference Larry Tate before...<g> That's cool.
Lee

More so when I grew up and met people who were just like that.

I just tried to use this for my desktop image and it is off center and very blurry. Is there a larger version that would work?


thanks

**Hillary...We are being deprived of thousands of patriotic men and women who want to serve their country who are bringing skills into the armed services that we desperately need, like translation skills.**

Yes, we gays are noted for our translating skills. haha What!

I cannot believe she wouldn't answer the "immoral" question. What a cop-out. When Bill was elected and they had THE party afterwords, Ellen Degeneras and her girlfriend were two of the guests. Supposedly Bill and Hill have tons of gay friends. I wonder how they feel about her refusing to take them out of the Immoral category.

I would still vote for her and I don't entirely blame her. This is a sick and twisted homophobic country but I still wish she had more brass than that cop-out.
Lee

Thats the ketch nobody seems to understand. The Democratic base doesn't want the governments nose in our private business.

She was asked a direct question about what SHE thought. She refused to answer.

Truthfully, I think, underneath, Hillary and Bill are probably the MOST gay-friendly. They seem to be the most sophisticated, Hollywood, etc. I wish she had the guts to answer the DIRECT question about her OPINION.

Anyway, don't worry, Hillary is my candidate of choice. That hasn't changed.
Lee

There hasn't been a time when the Clinton's haven't bent over back wards to do what needs to be done to give people what they want and need. The beauty of it all, is, this time, they can get things done with a Democratic Congress. Bill didn't have that Luxury the last time, not with a Republican controlled Congress the last 14 years.

And you can bet your sweet bippy, they'll get NOLA and Ole Miss squared away right quick, surer than sh*t!

no matter how she answered it.

Thought we should consider appending that to your first sentence.

She's going to get a lot of tough questions and the Right Wing will use her answers, her non-answers, whatever, against her. She better get used to it.

She still needs to take the righteous stand. She's got my vote. I don't have to claim she's saint-like. I think she screwed up. To NOT take an affirmative stand against bigotry is wrong.
Lee

bigotry smack of discrimination. I don't believe Hillary is biased in any of those respects. In fact, I think she shows a visible leaning towards fairness to all. She's lived under a microscope for the last 15 yrs and never has there been such a feeding frenzy of disinformation from onlookers as there was here last night. Well, with the exception of the Right Wing Wackos! Really disheartening...

THEY bring it up when it's convenient for them, including "our" side. Not standing up against bigotry is immoral.
Lee

it's a hot button issue and sure to cause the Christian Right to implode.
Which is not a bad thing...imo-

They are ALL going to have to address it eventually.
Lee

she would have been accused of pandering to the GLBT lobby....

I'm still reverberating from the crush of the venom and bile elicited from the "mob". I swear, last night, I heard someone mention they had a rope and all they needed was a tree. Strikingly, familiar stuff from the racist 60's. Funny how easily people can become themselves, what they hate most.

these last few days...

But, you know, it's not such a bad thing for a candidate to be hated here at DU. Kerry got the same treatment as HRC is getting, once he became the frontrunner.

The question posed to her is: Is it immoral?

She replied by saying basically, 'that's not for me to answer'

She then said she is "proud" to stand by gay people.

Why should a politician be judging another person's sexual choice? It's not their business to judge what is moral or immoral when it comes to a person's sexual preference.

Perhaps her answer should have been, "I am not going to judge what is moral when it comes to a person' s private life."

Let's ask ourselves that question. "Is homosexuality immoral?

I would have to say "that' s not my business to engage in that discussion."

She was asked a direct question. I'm fairly sure she has an opinion on that. I'm going to vote for the lady. Give me a break. I just wish she had answered that.
Lee

Do you think homosexuality is immoral?

Plus, that is not really an allowed question here. It's right in the rules and they reposted them just last week. It is a GIVEN here, that we are not immoral and we deserve the same rights as all other humans.
Lee

This isn't something to be engaged in discussing. Thus, Hillary was absolutely correct.
Regards,
Captain_Nemo

...and I like that in a person.

...but she was asked a direct question and should have said "NO gays are not immoral".

We are allowed to say that here. We are allowed to discuss gay rights. People just aren't allowed to say we should NOT get them.

Here's a link to one of the threads:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=367112

Lee

Madspirit,

I wil read that thread thoroughly. I am 100% for Gay rights/marriage. I'm a feminist.

I wanted to engage in a line of questioning with you to illustrate what I think Senator Clinton feels is improper for her to be engaged in

People will start dredging up Bill's behavior.

she could have answered the question as you suggested, ""NO gays are not immoral".

Then, the questioner would have asked something else about morality.

Also, the insertion of peoples concept of "morality" into politics is particularly dangerous to me. We have been fighting it since the religous right gave us Ronald Reagan in 1980.

I am a feminist, strongly pro-choice and I celebrate pagan holidays. I am pretty sure a lot of people who vote republican think I am immoral. My opinion on them - its none of their business to opine publicly on my choices in life.

In Solidarity,
Captain_Nemo

As someone on another thread said, about this:

"Avoiding the condemnation of bigotry is immoral."

She may find herself in many uncomfortable situations because of Bill's behavior. She simply needs to stand up straight, look the asshats in the eyes and answer. We will stand behind her.

An aside...Welcome to Democratic Underground.
...and I have read every Jules Verne book that exists, many times and with a map and/or globe to map the routes and stuff...(obviously not the moon..but 20,000 Leagues, etc.)

Another feminist! Whoohoohoo!

Lee

Yes, she could have said, "My opinon on another person's personal choices in life is not my business. But, since you asked, I stand by gay people and I believe they are not immoral."

She could have used it to make a point. And, then she could stand firm and move on.

Hillary is a careful politician. Maybe so much so that she missed this opportunity.

But, we are in such a state in our society when it comes to how the republicans have defined/co-opted "morality."

And, they have the media to jump on the their morality bandwagon. I can't say I believe that we have a poplulation that thinks and analyzes - they seem to just take the rhetoric and propaganda as fact.

I think Hillary (after Whitewater and the impeachment,) is all to aware of how things spin out of control.

Captain_Nemo

I just wish she had said more.
Lee

She has my vote too.
And, thanks for the welcome. I love Jules Verne, too!

:crazy:

But is a question that has leads to a potentially damaging line of questioning for a candidate whose husband was impeached for a engaging in oral sex with another woman. And, let's think back , hmm I think there was something there about a Cuban cigar too.


Is having sex with a cuban cigar moral?

she should tell them, it's more important for Gays to be recognized as equals in the eyes of the Law.
And I believe that to be the real issue here. I don't want government poking their nose in my business.

she didn't know how to answer the question, so she had to go back and talk to her people, and form a committee to discuss whether or not Hillary Clinton thinks that homosexuality is immoral.

so, really, she shouldn't have addressed that at all but she was asked.

No need for her to offer a definition or a concrete take on it (though it isn't a tough call) she just wants to keep it on THEM.

If she would have said that it's NOT immoral, like anyone would expect her to say, we wouldn't even be discussing this now. Instead, she gave an answer that takes the focus away from Pace and puts it on her.

I totally disagree that by not giving a direct answer it keeps it on THEM.

"but we know have evidence as to the fact that we are in a time of war -- when we really need as many people as we can to recruit and retain in an all-volunteer army -- we are turning people away or discharging them not because of what they've done but because of who they are."

It was an easy yes, no answer, and she failed, she is more concerned that there are enough bodies for the illegal, IMMORAL war in Iraq, she totally disgusts me

Whether you agree with it or not.

It's a smart thing to point out especially against the republican opponents. Thats what the whole questioning was about in the first place.