I just read this article that said that Palin wants there to be a federal ban on gay marriage, rather than McCain's views to make it a state issue. I think this is bad for the McCain campaign to get some moderate votes, and he was already having some trouble with that like Moeka said earlier. At least someone in this election is taking a firm stance, because I can't really tell Biden or Obama's stance on this issue from what htey have said. I wonder if they really aren't for it, or want more votes, and the same for McCain because leaving it to the states doesn't give a concrete answer even though they've all said they are against it. It'll be interesting to see how this news affects McCain's poll ratings.
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20081020/Palin.Gay.Marriage/
Original Article ^
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Ugh. Marriage should be between two people, not two people and the state. I'm not sure this will affect mccain's poll ratings, but obama should have this election in the bag anyway.
I disagree that this will drive some moderates from the McCain ticket since for most of the country gay rights aren't a moderate issue. Quite a bit of the country still feels that gay rights are a platform of the radical left. Also, I doubt that there were many moderates liberal enough in their social views to support gay rights who were in the McCain camp to begin with.
I agree with both of the previous comments. I think much of the country is against any sort of gay marriage. We are lucky enough to live in a place like the bay area that is so heavily democratic and liberal, so we are far less aware of the strong opinions in other parts of the US. In addition, I thought this article was interesting. But I think it is interesting that Palin would take a different stance on this issue that McCain. While I disagree that there should be any kind of bans anywhere on gay marriage, I would at least prefer that it be a state issue. That makes more sense anyway since political views vary so much from state to state.
I think Palin's stance is predictable based on how she is trying to appeal to the conservative "base" of evangelicals and social conservatives. Her taking this strong stand on marriage will only further energize the base but could be seen as a mistake as it might not appeal to independent voters who have a more nuanced view on the issue. Though many voters do not support gay marriage a constitutional amendment might seem like an overreaction.
I think gay marriage has to balance between state and federal control, due to the fact that marriage does actually cost states in marriage benefits. However, it is a rights issue, and something should be done about the treatment of gays anyway. There are far too many horror stories of not being able to see your partner in the hospital, or being able to make decisions about their health, or not being able to adopt children, or being able to rent a one bedroom apartment for two men, it's just wrong and shows how the world is really in need of a tolerance lesson.
Post a Comment