Is This the Year Democrats Embrace Marriage Equality?

[William769]

As this summer’s Democratic National Convention approaches, all eyes are on party leaders to see whether this will be the year Democrats go all in for marriage.

In 2012 nearly 200 American mayors, including convention chairman and Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, and several Democratic leaders, including House minority leader Nancy Pelosi, have said the party should lead on this issue rather than trail the electorate, who, according to many polls, approve of marriage rights for all Americans. While President Obama remains mum on this question, Freedom to Marry is asking voters to push Democratic leaders and the president’s reelection campaign to include marriage equality in the party platform with its Democrats: Say I Do crusade.

The Democratic platform in 2008 was then considered the most LGBT-friendly major party platform ever. Though it did not explicitly call for marriage equality, the party established its support for repealing the Defense of Marriage Act, passing antidiscrimination laws, reversing “don’t ask, don’t tell,” and instituting LGBT-inclusive hate-crimes prevention policies.

Four years later, though civil unions and domestic partnerships are available to many same-sex couples, numerous studies show that these arrangements fail to provide the same legal and societal benefits as marriage. Since the 2008 platform was introduced at the Democratic convention in Denver, the states of Washington, New York, New Hampshire, Maryland, Iowa, Connecticut, and Vermont, and the District of Columbia, have enacted marriage equality, either legislatively or through the courts. The repeal of marriage equality in California via Proposition 8 and subsequent legal battle over the repeal has been eye-opening to many Democrats, who wonder if even one of the bluest states can rescind civil rights granted to its citizens, isn’t federal protection needed?

http://www.advocate.com/Print_Issue/Advance/Is_This_the_Year_Democrats_Embrace_Marriage_Equality/

[xchrom]

1. Du rec. Nt

[LonePirate]

2. Without Obama's support, marriage equality will not appear in the party platform.

I simply do not see how it happens otherwise. If he won't sign the EO, I do not foresee him supporting this.

[Bluenorthwest]

3. Not with this President.

Too prejudiced and ignorant.

[racaulk]

4. Doubtful. Not with Obama as the de facto leader of the Democratic Party.

Perhaps with some of those whose names are being thrown around as possible Presidential contenders for 2016 (i.e., Andrew Cuomo, Elizabeth Warren, etc.), but not with this President. I think 2016 is the earliest we can hope for having marriage equality as part of the Democratic Party national platform.

Although I would love to be proven wrong. It has happened before.

[The Philosopher]

5. When the leader of the party

makes a mistake on LGBT rights and the response isn't to make amends, but rather tell us how much he's done....it doesn't inspire much hope.

Perhaps when he wins the election someone will be brave to point out to him that A) it's easy to look pro-gay considering the decades and people he's following; B) when a long chain of hard, tremendous effort exists before you even got on the stage and then you take credit for them...makes you look like an ass, because what you're really doing is insulting not only the activists and politicians who have been struggling on these issues already, but you're insulting the intelligence of the community you're claiming you're working for.

Maybe then he'll realize what he's been doing all along and change. Then we'll hear him interrupt the first White House press question on national security or gas prices or economic bills he's touting and say, "How about we talk about ENDA for a minute..." and "I think we should consider Same-Sex Marriage for a moment..." and more than one time.

[racaulk]

8. +1

Excellent post!

When I first saw that tweet a few days ago, essentially "Teh List" with rainbow colors, I cringed because I knew someone would take that post and use it to start a flamewar in GD here at DU. To use it as yet another opportunity to proverbially beat us over the heads while pretending to post under the guise of celebrating progressive accomplishments. I'm not sure if anyone did, I haven't cared enough to look. It just gets really tiresome to be used as a wedge to divide Democrats and further the goals of some while simultaneously being seen as a petulant child who is worthy of scorn, contempt, and sarcasm.

As activists and Democrats, we give too much to this party to be treated in this way. I look forward to the time when all Democrats embrace a platform of marriage equality simply because it's the right thing to do, not because they realize that it's finally politically expedient for them to do so.

[The Philosopher]

9. Hasn't the list

with colors already made an appearance on DU? I think I remember something like that months ago.

[Vanje]

10. This list?

[racaulk]

11. It was. I remember seeing it posted at DU also.

But this new list has been updated through March 2012. New and improved!

[joeybee12]

6. Not gonna happen...nt

[Fearless]

7. Doubtful. We don't mean enough to them.

They think they have our support regardless of how they treat us. It's up to us to prove them otherwise. Use your wallets. Donate to Democrats that support marriage equality. Don't donate to those who hold right wing bigoted views or those who suggest that separate but equal civil unions is good enough.