The candidates on Gay issues

[VoteClark]

I want to encourage people to really think about what effect the President has on gay issues. NONE. I have only heard one candidate truly address the issues of gay rights fairly. That man was Al Sharpton. He said that supporting Civil Unions is hypocrisy from a civil rights standpoint. He said it was like supporting blacks not to have the right to marry but it was OK for them to shack up. That is exactly correct.

As a gay man myself, I think that supporting a candidate because he wants to treat gay people as "almost as good but not quiet as good" as everyone else, has his head someplace else. I think that you either think that gay people need to be given the SAME rights or you don't. I don't respect candidates that don't try to get the gay vote but still are trying to still capture the bulk vote.

I also think that gay issues will not be resolved by politicans. It will be solved by the courts. The courts are the ones that give gay people equal rights. I am sick of these politicans saying they will do something for gay people. They don't, they can't, they will not be reelected.

So vote on something else. Dean can take credit for the Vermont supreme court decision because he was governor at the time and Kerry can take credit for Gay marriage because he is a Senator of Massachuetts at the time. BUT REALLY, they didn't do sh*t about it before the rulings of the courts. So they get nothing from me.

I am voting for Clark, because international peace and national security are at stake. Clark will take action. To me this is more important than lip service of politicans talking about what they think about gay people.

J4Clark

[boilerbabe]

1. I don't know anything about Clark

but I am going to do my best to make sure that we all get our best deserts, whether gay, straight, or otherwise...so do feel free to fill me in...the more i know, the better off i am!!

[VoteClark]

5. BoilerBabe. Please visit these sites to learn about Clark

Who is Clark?
His Biography
http://www.draftclark2004.com/biography.aspWhat Clark Stand For:
The issues
http://www.draftclark2004.com/issues.asp

Any other links I can learn more about Clark?
No, you don't have to be a women to visit this GREAT site
http://www.women4clark.com/

Thank you

J4Clark

[Rowdyboy]

2. Clark's a great guy and all but...

has he picked a party yet? If so, I missed the news. I would vote for Wes Clark in a heartbeat-he is 1st class, grade A electable. But he won't even say he's a Democrat! It's getting late and serious professionals have already committed to one of the declared candidates. It would take a miracle for Wes Clark to announce party affiliation and win the White House at this point. I'd love to see it happen, but I just don't have that good an imagination.

[VoteClark]

6. Don't worry Rowdyboy

Clark will run and will run on the Democrats side. I don't want him to declare yet. It would diminish his chances. Right now people are excited by Dean. But it is slowing down. The media always has a favorite at this point in the race. 04 is Dean, 00'was bradley, 92 was Toungas, 68'McCarthy, ect. Yet the winning candidate was never offically in the race until later. This is July of 03'. The election is the end of 04' The NH primary is not for another 6 months/half a year. Clinton did not enter the race until October of the election. I think Clark has weaker, less known, and less liked candidates to overcome.
Some interesting facts: Clark is second to Dean in candidate traffic on the internet. In a poll in NH, he ranks third. These are strong signs of a winning candidate. Clark supporters have spent only a few thousand dollars to Dean,Kerry, and Gephardt's campaigns of millions.
Now if he only spent a few thousand dollars and only about 20% of the population knows him and he ranks second on the internet and 3rd in NH how is he going to do when he spends millions and 95% of the population knows him? So, I am not worried. Kerry and Dean can attrached all the Hard-care political people they want. It is the mainstream undecided voters that get you in office and that is what Clark attracts. I know of only a few people that don't like Clark.

He doesn't declare a party at this point because it will stir up emotions of the other candidates and increase spending. He is also mobilizing a huge number of Republicans that are helping with the campaign. So it doesn't want to lost their support right off the bat. I for one am voting for Clark, and only Clark for President.

J4Clark

[Mairead]

3. Check your facts, please

"His overriding philosophy is that same sex couples and opposite sex couples should be equal in the eyes of the law. All benefits and legal entitlements available to heterosexual couples should be available to homosexual couples."

[VoteClark]

7. That is fine and dandy but. . . . .

Not that I am knocking Kucinich, but
What has he done for gay people?
Has he passed equal marriage for gays in the town he was mayor of?
Did he write any legislation to give gays and lesbians the right to adoption during his 30+ years in office?
Did he ever even say: I don't think Civil unions are fair, Gays need to have full marriage?
Did he introduce or back any legislation as a state senator, US Represenative, or City council member?
Did he vote for any legislation to allow gays to enter the military?

Please tell me, I know of nothing that he has done, other then on TV saying that he supports Civil Unions?

I am sure he means well, but unless you can show in detail one thing he has done besides talk, I can't consider him any different then the other 9 candidates in the race at this point.

Thank you

J4Clark

[LWolf]

11. I think so.

I'm watching the Human Rights Campaign presidential forum right now, and I believe I remember that from what DK said. Check it out; he is the 2nd or 3rd candidate to speak:

http://www.hrc.org/

7 of the 9 were there.

You can also read the individual candidate responses from that site.

On the question:

Currently, no state recognizes any legal form of marriage for same sex couples. Do you believe the civil institution of marriage (with absolutely no requirements imposed on religious institutions) should be made legally available to two committed adults of the same sex?

Three supported; Kucinich, Braun, & Sharpton. The rest opposed.

[dsc]

13. Dennis K

was mayor of Cleveland in the 1970's and we still don't have that in Cleveland now. I don't think he can be faulted there. He wasn't in Congress for DADT or DOMA. He is a staunch supporter of efforts to repeal those and of ENDA.

[izzie]

4. IN the 50's this happened......

Lived near a Summer place with lots of artist and actors. A man in town could marry people. NP. And he married two men from this town and it was sort of a head nodding subject but every one said 'oh well it is their lives' and left at that. Now I was a teen ager and know it was fine for people to do as they liked and was not my business.

[RogueTrooper]

8. With respect

Howard Dean signed that bill at great political risk. He decided that it was immoral to scapegoat a group of people for political gain. After signing the bill he had to run for re-election. He had to run against the well organized and well resourced Religious Right. He faced them down. Many of the people who supported that legsilation lost their seats because of their support for that bill.

Signing the Civil Unions bill has become the catalyst for the equal rights movement. Howard Dean deserves credit where credit is due.

[VoteClark]

9. Really, what about if. . .

Not to knock Dean, I am curious, which members of the house or senate in the Vermont Legislature lost their seats?

What would have happend if Dean didn't sign the civil rights bill, it was required to do so by the Vermont supreme court?

What else has Dean done for Gay people (aside lip service like the others)?

J4Clark

[RogueTrooper]

10. Some answers

snip...

Legislative races were hotly contested, too, and many turned on the civil unions law. At least nine Democratic incumbents in the House lost re-election. One independent went down to defeat and so did three Republicans.

All of those candidates who were defeated had voted in favor of civil unions, although some of the races turned on other issues because both major-party candidates favored the law.

..snip

http://www.usatoday.com/news/vote2000/vt/main.htm

I am not sure what would have happened had be not signed the law. I do know that he did sign the bill and then fought, and won, a bitter election campaign.

Throughout his tenure as Govenor Howard Dean has shown consistent support for Vermont's Gay and Lesbian community. Signing the Civil Unions bill was not the start of Dean's support for GLBT community.

snip...

Governor: Incumbent Democratic Governor Howard Dean is likely to face Republican Bernard Rome. Dean has historically been a supporter of the GLBT community. Little is known about Rome although he came out against gay marriage at his campaign announcement. (Interviews with Rome and Dean are scheduled to appear in the May issue of OITM).
...snip

http://www.mountainpridemedia.org/apr98/gayvote.htm

[dsc]

12. Some more answers

First, the Vermont Constitution is not engraved in granite. It can, and could have been, altered. In this case it was a somewhat long process but not nearly as difficult as a US Constitutional amendment. Basically it would have taken a 2/3 vote of the Senate (in 99) and a 50% +1 vote in the House (in 99). Then in 2000 the people would have had to vote for this by referendum (50% +1). Finally both Houses would have had to reratify (50% +1). Given that marriage had about a 35% approval rating I don't think this was an insurmountable obsticle.

Second, Dean's record in this regard is as follows. 1992 worked for and signed a non discrimination law. 1996 gave gays and lesbians the right to jointly adopt children. Appointed the first openly gay Vermont House member. Signed anit gay harassment legislation.

Third, there is no difference in terms of rights granted between a Vermont marriage between same sex people and a Vermont Civil Union for people who live in Vermont. Dean couldn't have granted any federal rights here. The only people who got harmed by this route are non Vermonters. They can't use this to sue their own states for marriage under Full Faith and Credit or equity rights.

Links will be later (in a seperate post) as I have to go but I did want to get the info to you.

The info on the Vermont Constitution was found by typing Vermont Constitution into a search engine. Dean's record is discussed in Out in the Mountains which is Vermonts LGBT news paper. Also found via a search on Dean and Civil Unions.

[gottaB]

14. What you're really saying

is that we should ignore all the debates that have occurred so far because your guy is disadvantaged by waiting so long to declare. Excuse me, but there are issues besides war, and in any case the office of the president does matter. The others are taking positions and debating them. Where's your guy?

There is some rectitude in your focus on the courts as the place where important issues affecting gays will be decided. There is one candidate who has said as much, Carol Moseley Braun. You've dissed her candidacy in another thread. Well, besides agreeing with her on some civil rights issues, you also know for a fact that she is a Democrat and she is running for President. So what was that about lip service?

Have you somehow forgotten that the President appoints judges? Exercizes control over the DOJ? Does your guy have any experience or expertise in the area of Constitutional law?

I don't beleive your fanaticism. You know that any of these candidates would be better that Bush on foreign policy and civil rights. You know that some of them would be acceptable to you. If this is the best your guy's campaign offer--dismissing everybody else and the full range of issues people are talking about--forget about it. You're alienating people before they even know how to say your guy's name.

[revcarol]

15. Kucinich believes in gay marriage as a HUMAN RIGHT.

He is not in a position to DO anything nationally as a member of Congress, all by himself.

But President Kucinich could sure appoint judges who believe in HUMAN RIGHTS, give gays rights they didn't have by administrative actions(get rid of don't ask, don't tell,full rights in the military,ETC.) and SET THE TONE for dealing with gay issues as HUMAN RIGHTS.