Do you think the Democrats should fight for Gay Marriage rights *now*?

[ecstatic]

Read choices carefully :-)

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

1. Other: I feel the Dems should ALWAYS fight AGAINST discrimination

[ibegurpard]

2. Agreed

I'm not expecting them to be on the forefront of this but I sure as hell expect them to be AGAINST efforts to limit constitutional protections.

[patrice]

3. I agree.

Democrats should do what is right with whomever needs the help, and they should systematically reinforce and follow-up on agreements with "others" that exchange work for work on any of the issues.

[trof]

4. See my post "not ABOUT gay marriage".

And yes, I agree totally.
A great point has been made that the constitution has should never be amended to RESTRICT rights.
They tried it once with the Volstead Act (prohibition), and we all know how successful THAT was.

[fob]

5. Don't you think the idea of gay marriage rights, or any rights, attached

to the idea of a soldier that happens to be gay would be a winning strategy?

Mr Kerry do you support gay marriage?

Yes. I support equal rights for all men are created equal by their creator and if they can sign up and have there lives on the line for us than who am I, who is george bush*, who the hell are YOU to tell them they can't marry? Are you some kind of fascist? If that's what you're looking for you already have THAT kind of candidate.

Bring on the culture war, those right-wing cheney's never expect the Spanish Inquisition!!

[m-jean03]

11. FoeOfBush, I think that's a GREAT idea! :-)

[MsUnderstood]

6. Yes--If the Repubs wanna start a fight we should stick up for ourselves

[ulysses]

7. they don't have the luxury of a choice.

It might be more convenient to wait, but the GOP is already waging the battle. To wait now means to not fight at all.

[drthais]

8. OTHER:

not the right time
YES to fighting against writing discrimination into the constitutio(of course)
but the votes just aren't there right now
for or against..its a political ploy...
and the Repugs know it

[ikojo]

9. I am not gay but I get tired of people thinking gays

and lesbians must put THEIR rights on the back burner because it just might offend some mythical swing voter in some part of the US.

The function of leaders is to LEAD. Kerry and Edwards should step out in front and say, it is a good and correct thing that all people in the US should have the same rights afforded to them regardless of sexual orientation. This is the leadership people are looking for. Democrats who stand for something instead of Bush lite.


STOP LETTING THE RIGHT-WING SET THE AGENDA!!!!!

OY VEY!

If the Democrats in the 1960s waited until Americans were ready for integration and voting rights for blacks, there would still be poll taxes and literacy tests required to vote.

Most of the time people have to be SHOWN what is right.

[TexasSissy]

15. Errr, haven't you seen the polls? Most Americans are against gay marriage

The GOP is very safe pushing this issue. Safe with its base, appealing to swing voters, appealing to blue collar workers, NASCAR dads, soccer moms, and most of middle America.

I am not. But mom and pop in Peoria, Illinois, see it as very prudent, I'm sure, to have an amendment "stopping this madness," as they might see it.

It was a bad idea to push the issue before the election, and so soon before the election. If Massachusetts & California hadn't happened, there would be constitutional amendment being considered right now. Now that it is, the GOP will not give up on it. Just like it won't give up on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

We can only hope it doesn't pass (this time). There will, of course, be a next time, if * wins. And this issue gets * votes, sad to say.

[ikojo]

16. Back in the 50s and 60s most polls would have

said white Americans were against integration. Truth be told most probably are against it now, if living patterns are any indication. That is why we have leaders to show us a better way.

Perhaps I am idealistic but right is right. Just because a poll claims that many people feel a particular way does not make that issue right.

[Beam Me Up]

10. I am gay and sick of this issue. It has only one purpose:

Divide and conquer.

[Crachet2004]

13. Yep. And someday the courts will decide the whole thing.

And a positive result will happen a whole lot sooner if we win the next election, and get back into the business of picking judges.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

12. I'm for it but we can't do ANYTHING that will risk us losing this election

If it hurts us - I'd rather wait - if it will help us then go for it.

[CaTeacher]

14. If not now.....

Then when?

It will never be a "convenient time".

Why should you ask people to wait for their rights? Especially since these are people who loyally support this party (even through things like don't ask don't tell). It is pathetic to turn our backs on our base and our core beliefs. People who come out against gay rights WILL be on my list.

[Taylor Mason Powell]

17. Wow, there are lots of good arguments on all sides of this.

There's even ONE good argument against gay marriage, and that's the argument that the government should get out of the marriage business entirely and have civil unions for everyone. But I digress.

It seems to me there's the moral issue, and then there's the strategic issue.

On the moral side, the way to frame it is as an issue of DISCRIMINATION. I agree with the poster who said the Dems should always fight against discrimination.

On the strategic side, I don't think this issue really helps Bush as much as some seem to think. This issue ranks consistently near the bottom when people are asked to rank the importance of various issues. Especially because Bush has so fucked up everything else, I think the gay marriage issue isn't really going to swing many people at all. Not to mention the fact that the people who feel strongly about this (on the anti-gay side) were probably already on Bush's side anyway. He was chosen by Jayzus to lead us, don'tcha know!

As a matter of political strategy, if I was forced to make a choice, I would say the Dems should do whatever is necessary to get Bush out of the WH, even if that means not pressing the issue. Simply because it is the one thing that needs to happen before ANY of the rest of the gay rights agenda can happen. (Or any civil rights agenda, for that matter, or the peace agenda, or the environmental agenda, or the labor agenda, etc. etc.)