Friday, October 3, 2008

Why Joe Biden Didn't Throw the Gays Under the Bus

To all of you, who were disgusted with Biden's comment last night regarding same-sex marriage, pump your brakes. The misconception of his statement is bleeding heavily and needs to stop. This is what Joe Biden said:

"In an Obama-Biden administration, there will be absolutely no distinction from a constitutional standpoint or a legal standpoint between a same-sex and a heterosexual couple. The fact of the matter is that under the Constitution we should be granted - same-sex couples should be able to have visitation rights in the hospitals, joint ownership of property, life insurance policies, et cetera. That’s only fair. It’s what the Constitution calls for. And so we do support it. We do support making sure that committed couples in a same-sex marriage are guaranteed the same constitutional benefits as it relates to their property rights, their rights of visitation, their rights to insurance, their rights of ownership as heterosexual couples do."

What does that sound like to me? It sounds like a civil union, which is what heterosexual couples get when they secure a license in front of a justice of the peace. So when he said that they don't support changing the traditional views of marriage he meant exactly that. The word "Marriage" is purely religious and is deemed to those whose nuptials are performed in the church. Separate but equal has no part in this debate, yes, but what Biden and Obama support is simply equal. They can't legally make any church or religious organization recognize gay couples; but in the event they get married, however they choose, they will be guaranteed all civil rights and protections under federal law. You can read that on Obama's page as well as on

Additionally, Obama has promised to work for the passage of ENDA, the Matthew Shepard act and the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell. This is the closest America has gotten to recognizing gay rights from a major political candidate. Come on gays, I mean guys, get your underwear out of a bunch. So what, your catholic church won't marry you, several churches have rules about whom they will marry and even end up turning away heterosexual couples. An Obama/Biden administration would be both tolerant and affirming; and by the way, Obama's church recognizes same-sex marriage. Don't get caught up in semantics, especially facing the opposition.

Wanna know what Palin said last night? Her head nearly exploded getting the words out of her mouth when she said, [referring to benefits] "Not if it goes closer and closer towards redefining the traditional definition of marriage between one man and one woman. And unfortunately that’s sometimes where those steps lead." Then she went on about how diverse her family was and how "tolerant" she was.

Again, this is right along the lines of "I have black friends so I can't be racist". Let me remind you that Palin has been quoted before asserting that being gay is a choice. Could it be that's why she's neither affirmed nor disclaimed her church's support for the "pray away the gay" conference? What do you think a McCain/Palin administration would do for LGBT rights? For that matter, what would it do for women's rights? The answer, take us back 100 years. People like Harvey Milk, the Stonewall protesters and others bore the brunt of society so we wouldn't have to. If homosexuality and gender identity are re-criminalized, their contributions will have been in vein. Please, get off your ass and educate people about what's at stake in this election. Let me put it this way, you don't want to wake up on November 5th and wonder if there was something else you could have done.


No comments: