Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Cheney's Gay Marriage Comments Draw Fire

Expand Messages
  • nyguy_1225
    I find it fascinating that the matter of gay people and their partnerships is so at the forefront of the deciding issues for this coming election. No matter
    Message 1 of 3 , Aug 25, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I find it fascinating that the matter of gay people and their
      partnerships is so at the forefront of the deciding issues for this
      coming election. No matter who you intend to vote for, this clearly
      illustrates just how far we've come! The following is from today's
      New York Times...

      -Alex


      CHENEY'S GAY MARRIAGE COMMENTS DRAW FIRE

      Tue Aug 24, 7:12 PM ET
      By TODD DVORAK, Associated Press Writer

      DAVENPORT, Iowa - Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites),
      whose daughter Mary is a lesbian, drew criticism from both
      proponents and foes of gay marriage Tuesday after he distanced
      himself from President Bush (news - web sites)'s call for a
      constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.

      At a campaign rally in this Mississippi River town, Cheney spoke
      supportively about gay relationships, saying "freedom means freedom
      for everyone," when asked about his stand on gay marriage.

      "Lynne and I have a gay daughter, so it's an issue our family is
      very familiar with," Cheney told an audience that included his
      daughter. "With the respect to the question of relationships, my
      general view is freedom means freedom for everyone ... People ought
      to be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to.

      "The question that comes up with the issue of marriage is what kind
      of official sanction or approval is going to be granted by
      government? Historically, that's been a relationship that has been
      handled by the states. The states have made that fundamental
      decision of what constitutes a marriage," he said.

      Bush backs a constitutional amendment prohibiting gay marriage, a
      move Cheney says was prompted by various judicial rulings, including
      the action in Massachusetts that made gay marriage legal.

      "I think his perception was that the courts, in effect, were
      beginning to change, without allowing the people to be involved,"
      Cheney said. "The courts were making the judgment for the entire
      country."

      Addressing Bush's position on the amendment, Cheney said, "at this
      point, save my own preference, as I have stated, but the president
      makes policy for the administration. He's made it clear that he
      does, in fact, support a constitutional amendment on this issue."

      Those comments drew criticism from the conservative Family Research
      Council, with President Tony Perkins saying, "I find it hard to
      believe the vice president would stray from the administration's
      position on defense policy or tax policy. For many pro-family
      voters, protecting traditional marriage ranks ahead of the economy
      and job creation as a campaign issue."

      Perkins added that if Cheney sees a problem with activist
      judges, "then how can he not endorse the same solution the president
      and his pro-family allies have proposed? We urge Vice President
      Cheney to support President Bush and a constitutional amendment on
      marriage."

      Steven Fisher, spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, a gay and
      lesbian advocacy group, said Cheney's remarks show a stark
      difference with Bush's efforts "to put discrimination in the
      Constitution."

      President Bush is feeling the heat. The administration has been
      using gay Americans to drive a wedge into the electorate. There are
      millions of American families who have gay family members and
      friends, who are offended by the president's use of discrimination,"
      Fisher said.

      Last month, Lynne Cheney said states should have the final say over
      the legal status of personal relationships, a comment that came just
      days before the Senate failed to back the ban.

      Cheney said the amendment did not have the votes to pass, but he
      also said the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which President
      Clinton (news - web sites) signed into law in 1996, may be enough.

      "Most states have addressed this and there is on the books the
      federal statute, the Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1996, and to
      date, it has not been successfully challenged in the courts and may
      be sufficient to resolve the issue,"
      the vice president said.

      The Cheneys have two daughters, both of whom are working on the
      campaign. Mary Cheney is director of vice presidential operations
      for the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign. She held a public role as
      her father's assistant in the 2000 campaign and helped the GOP
      recruit gay voters during the
      2002 midterm elections.

      During the 2000 campaign, vice presidential candidate Dick Cheney
      took the position that states should decide legal issues about
      personal relationships and that people should be free to enter
      relationships of their choosing.

      Sens. John Kerry (news - web sites) of Massachusetts and John
      Edwards (news - web sites) of North Carolina, oppose the amendment.
      The Democratic candidates also oppose gay marriage, but defend a gay
      couple's rights to the same legal protections as those conferred in
      marriage.

      -Alex
    • Norm
      The religious right s outcry against Dick Cheney is loud and clear: get back in-line! When asked about his thoughts on gay marriage, he side-stepped the issue
      Message 2 of 3 , Aug 28, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        The religious right's outcry against Dick Cheney is loud and clear:
        get back in-line! When asked about his thoughts on gay marriage, he
        side-stepped the issue and instead deferred to state's rights.
        Apparently, the reality of the anti-gay marriage amendment may hit
        too close to home for Cheney.

        Self-proclaimed "family values" advocates don't know how to respond
        to a father defending his daughter's right to have the freedom to
        pursue her own relationships. For years, conservatives claimed that
        they do not hate gays and in fact respect GLBTs' right to live
        freely. The vice president actually proclaimed this freedom in
        light of the gay marriage debate. The religious right reactionary
        rage seems to indicate that maybe they are not so respectful.

        The religious right is worried that his comments were calculated by
        the Bush/Cheney campaign as a swing to the left(?!?). I would call
        it an unintentional alteration from hatred to reluctant respect. I
        doubt Cheney's wishy-washy comments about gay marriage have inspired
        anyone.

        I never thought I would find myself defending Cheney, but below is
        the excerpt of his comments from the V.P.'s website. Unfortunately,
        either he stopped speaking at "...my own pre" or the transcript was
        cut-off.

        Norm!

        "Q We have a battle here on this land, as well. And I would like to
        know, sir, from your heart -- I don't want to know what your
        advisors say, or even what your top advisor thinks -- but I need to
        know what do you think about homosexual marriages.

        "THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, the question has come up obviously in the
        past with respect to the question of gay marriage. Lynne and I have
        a gay daughter, so it's an issue that our family is very familiar
        with. We have two daughters, and we have enormous pride in both of
        them. They're both fine young women. They do a superb job, frankly,
        of supporting us. And we are blessed with both our daughters.

        "With respect to the question of relationships, my general view is
        that freedom means freedom for everyone. People ought to be able to
        free -- ought to be free to enter into any kind of relationship they
        want to. The question that comes up with respect to the issue of
        marriage is what kind of official sanction, or approval is going to
        be granted by government, if you will, to particular relationships.
        Historically, that's been a relationship that has been handled by
        the states. The states have made that basic fundamental decision in
        terms of defining what constitutes a marriage. I made clear four
        years ago when I ran and this question came up in the debate I had
        with Joe Lieberman that my view was that that's appropriately a
        matter for the states to decide, that that's how it ought to best be
        handled.

        "The President has, as result of the decisions that have been made
        in Massachusetts this year by judges, felt that he wanted to support
        the constitutional amendment to define -- at the federal level to
        define what constitutes marriage, that I think his perception was
        that the courts, in effect, were beginning to change -- without
        allowing the people to be involved, without their being part of the
        political process -- that the courts, in that particular case, the
        state court in Massachusetts, were making the judgment or the
        decision for the entire country. And he disagreed with that. So
        where we're at, at this point is he has come out in support of a
        federal constitutional amendment. And I don't think -- well, so far
        it hasn't had the votes to pass. Most states have addressed this.
        There is on the books the federal statute Defense of Marriage Act
        passed in 1996. And to date it has not been successfully challenged
        in the courts, and that may be sufficient to resolve the issue. But
        at this point, say, my own pre

        "More questions, yes."

        --From http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/08/20040824-
        4.html
      • nyguy_1225
        It just goes to show that when the issue affects someone one loves, one thinks with not just one s mind but with one s heart too. That way of thinking involves
        Message 3 of 3 , Aug 28, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          It just goes to show that when the issue affects someone one loves,
          one thinks with not just one's mind but with one's heart too. That
          way of thinking involves the whole person and is always the wisest.

          -Alex


          --- In exexgayministry@yahoogroups.com, "Norm" <nojam75@y...> wrote:
          > The religious right's outcry against Dick Cheney is loud and
          clear:
          > get back in-line! When asked about his thoughts on gay marriage,
          he
          > side-stepped the issue and instead deferred to state's rights.
          > Apparently, the reality of the anti-gay marriage amendment may hit
          > too close to home for Cheney.
          >
          > Self-proclaimed "family values" advocates don't know how to
          respond
          > to a father defending his daughter's right to have the freedom to
          > pursue her own relationships. For years, conservatives claimed
          that
          > they do not hate gays and in fact respect GLBTs' right to live
          > freely. The vice president actually proclaimed this freedom in
          > light of the gay marriage debate. The religious right reactionary
          > rage seems to indicate that maybe they are not so respectful.
          >
          > The religious right is worried that his comments were calculated
          by
          > the Bush/Cheney campaign as a swing to the left(?!?). I would
          call
          > it an unintentional alteration from hatred to reluctant respect.
          I
          > doubt Cheney's wishy-washy comments about gay marriage have
          inspired
          > anyone.
          >
          > I never thought I would find myself defending Cheney, but below is
          > the excerpt of his comments from the V.P.'s website.
          Unfortunately,
          > either he stopped speaking at "...my own pre" or the transcript
          was
          > cut-off.
          >
          > Norm!
          >
          > "Q We have a battle here on this land, as well. And I would like
          to
          > know, sir, from your heart -- I don't want to know what your
          > advisors say, or even what your top advisor thinks -- but I need
          to
          > know what do you think about homosexual marriages.
          >
          > "THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, the question has come up obviously in
          the
          > past with respect to the question of gay marriage. Lynne and I
          have
          > a gay daughter, so it's an issue that our family is very familiar
          > with. We have two daughters, and we have enormous pride in both of
          > them. They're both fine young women. They do a superb job,
          frankly,
          > of supporting us. And we are blessed with both our daughters.
          >
          > "With respect to the question of relationships, my general view is
          > that freedom means freedom for everyone. People ought to be able
          to
          > free -- ought to be free to enter into any kind of relationship
          they
          > want to. The question that comes up with respect to the issue of
          > marriage is what kind of official sanction, or approval is going
          to
          > be granted by government, if you will, to particular
          relationships.
          > Historically, that's been a relationship that has been handled by
          > the states. The states have made that basic fundamental decision
          in
          > terms of defining what constitutes a marriage. I made clear four
          > years ago when I ran and this question came up in the debate I had
          > with Joe Lieberman that my view was that that's appropriately a
          > matter for the states to decide, that that's how it ought to best
          be
          > handled.
          >
          > "The President has, as result of the decisions that have been made
          > in Massachusetts this year by judges, felt that he wanted to
          support
          > the constitutional amendment to define -- at the federal level to
          > define what constitutes marriage, that I think his perception was
          > that the courts, in effect, were beginning to change -- without
          > allowing the people to be involved, without their being part of
          the
          > political process -- that the courts, in that particular case, the
          > state court in Massachusetts, were making the judgment or the
          > decision for the entire country. And he disagreed with that. So
          > where we're at, at this point is he has come out in support of a
          > federal constitutional amendment. And I don't think -- well, so
          far
          > it hasn't had the votes to pass. Most states have addressed this.
          > There is on the books the federal statute Defense of Marriage Act
          > passed in 1996. And to date it has not been successfully
          challenged
          > in the courts, and that may be sufficient to resolve the issue.
          But
          > at this point, say, my own pre
          >
          > "More questions, yes."
          >
          > --From http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/08/20040824-
          > 4.html
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.