Yoshie wrote:
> >It doesn't make any political sense for left-wing gay men to
> support a
> >pro-war straight white male candidate who *opposes* the equal
> right to
> >marriage for queers as well as straights and instead offers
> *second-class
> >marriage* called "civil union" to placate us <snip>
I addressed this elsewhere, but the first problem I have is the broad generalization about alleged "left-wing gay men", many of whom either are not, do not or wouldn't think to consider themselves "left."
But your assertion that gay people who support Kerry are self-defeating is false. First, the majority of queers are more interested in getting Bush out, first and foremost, because his stated objective is to push forward, almost gleefully, on this anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment. The language of the current version, as well as other versions being circulated, would not only halt the issue in the courts, but it would also bring into question the legalities of domestic partner benefits and other gains made in the last 20 years. Also, one doesn't have to be queer to be offended that Bush would consider this a priority or that he would so eagerly tamper with the Constitution.
Second, Kerry's stance, while not ideal, is still a move forward, in that his willingness to talk about the issue on a national level and at least accept that queers do have valuable, respectful relationships, continues the dialogue and keeps the doors very open to court challenges and the evolution of gay rights across the board.
A state can pass a DOMA act or ban gay marriage, but the opportunity for it to then be overturned by the federal Supreme Court still exists, down the road.
Nader can be pro-gay marriage all he wants. But he alone could not affect that change, forcing it down the throats of communities that are not even close to accepting it, and the "fix" is not going to be instantaneous. As such, the idea that if you are pro-gay marriage your only choice is Nader (or Cobb, for that matter), is bogus.
- Deborah