Vice presidential candidate John Edwards, campaigning Thursday in Cape Girardeau, said he and running mate John Kerry have “no objection” to this week’s vote in Missouri to amend the state constitution to ban gay marriage.

In an interview Thursday, Edwards told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch: “We’re both opposed to gay marriage and believe that states should be allowed to decide this question,”

On Tuesday, Missouri became the first state since the legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts to vote on amending its constitution to prevent such unions. More than 70 percent of voters supported the amendment.

Adopting a states’ rights approach, Kerry and Edwards have opposed the administration’s efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution to stop gays from marrying. Yet by supporting only limited rights such as civil unions and not objecting to state amendments like the Missouri ban, the Democratic candidates have disappointed many gay rights activists.

So one of my gay friends writes:

I was expecting them to say something like leave it to the states. I am disappointed that they intend to support discrimination against me. Why, oh why, aren’t there any good choices. Do you think that Howard Dean would have done this to the gay community?

I don’t know, but I have to believe in my heart that this is an issue where politics is trumping personal ideology. The GOP wants to make “Gay Marriage” (quotes and capitalization to signify the issue, not the concept) the wedge issue that brings out the conservative base.

What are Kerry/Edwards supposed to do? If they support “Gay Marriage”, then they capture a few gay votes they would’ve gotten anyway while successfully making the GOP’s wedge strategy work. If they are against “Gay Marriage”, do we really think the gay vote is suddenly going to Bush? Doubtful.

There are just some issues that are so culturally divisive that no candidate who hopes to make positive reform can succeed in getting elected if he speaks his mind. No candidate for national office can come out in support of gay marriage and expect to win.

I feel a sliver of the same pain with respect to marijuana legalization issues. No candidate in his right mind is going to come out and say that prohibition of marijuana is a policy that causes major harm to our society, and that we’d be better off with legal pot. Recently, my Representative, David Wu, voted against the Hinchey-Rohrabacher Amendment, which would’ve prohibited federal money from funding raids against pot co-ops in medical marijuana states. Does that mean my vote is now going to his Repugnican opponent? No way in hell.

So, how can you reconcile a Demonicrat with a “Gay Marriage” stance virtually identical to the Repugnican candidate? It’s all about the judges, baby. Which candidate is going to stock the federal courts with judges that will make it easier for gay issues to get the proper decisions they deserve? First clue: his name is not a synonym for a small shrub…

“Radical” Russ — I really have to believe in my heart that Kerry and Edwards aren’t really against gay marriage, even as they say they are against “Gay Marriage”… This is an issue that will be decided in the courts, not the Congress or Oval Office…

    ____________________________________________________________________

   |                                                                    

_  | "RADICAL" RUSS BELVILLE | Read More at http://radicalruss.net/blog/  

  | Portland, Oregon U.S.A. | Permission is granted for reprint of this      

  | © 2004 by Russ Belville | post, as long as this footer is included.