Kerry is an anti-gay bigot and a flip-flopper.

The BBQ Pit
1

In this thread, beagledave appropriately points out that John Kerry (et al) is advocating the same position that Bricker was positing. The position that there should be civil unions and not marriages for gays. Sol Grundy then goes on to insinuate that Bricker is a bigot by the following

[quote:]
(http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5285674&postcount=15)

So by those **same ** standards, John Kerry is also a bigot and needs to be called to task for it.

Example 1:

Example 2:

Example 3:

WHAT AN ASSHOLE.

What really gets me, is that he’s citing in example 2 his religious convictions for why marriage is as such and is voting that way.

HOW-FUCKING-EVER, the same bullshit religion he’s using to support his bigotry against gays doesn’t come in to play when it comes to abortion:

Example A:

Example B:

Example C:

Example D:

So. Kerry’s faith comes into play when it affects the decision about gay marriage but he separates his faith when it comes to abortion. The only reason left would be because he’s a bigot. Sure, he did sign back in 2002 urging the Massachusettes legislature not to put an amendment blocking gay marriage into effect and he’s now saying that it’s because it limited the possibility of civil unions. He has flip-flopped from his earlier position:

Funny, how he went from a person in power to Uncle Tom in a couple years. Unless he just “learned” more about gays in those 8 years and that has made him come to a better decision. :rolleyes:

So for all of those out there calling Bricker a bigot, don’t forget to throw John Kerry on to that pyre as well.

I’m still voting for Kerry. I’m not a one issue voter, I support pro-choice, non-privatized social security, etc etc. The lesser of two evils or the evil of two lessers.

I’m also hoping that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 will demonstrate that DOMA and all of this bullshit legislation is unconstitutional.

2

You can’t really judge a guy by what he says when he’s running for president. If Kerry said he supported gay marriage he’d get creamed. At least he supports civil unions, but in order to win he has to stay in the game.

FTR, I never called *Bricker a bigot.

3

Considering that on every other issue, Kerry is strongly gay supportive, I’m willing to cut him some slack. Kerry was one of the few who voted against, and even passionally fought DOMA. He testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee in favor of revoking the ban on homosexuals in the military. He is a co-sponser of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act (S.1252) and Permanent Partners Immigration Act (S.1510). He is against FMA. I also doubt that he would act on his feelings, even if they are more than political CYA, which is what I think it is.

4

What gets me is what a non-issue this is. You will find very few people around here who have not stated time and again that Kerry is simply the lesser of two evils. Taking people who “support” him to task for not being critical of him is just fucking stupid.

5

Oh, I’ll gladly criticize him for this. He’s a pandering asshole.

Unfortunately, there’s no non-asshole that’s got a chance of getting Bush out of power. I may wear a clothespin on my nose when I do it, but I’ll vote for Kerry anyway.

Daniel

6

Thank you.

But I’m a bit surprised that you seem to believe that Kerry is hiding his true position. Why do you not conclude that he means what he says? On what other positions is he hiding his true colors? And does Bush believe anything that’s different from what he’s saying?

7

He’s a politician. That means he has to represent his constituents, even when he disagrees with them. “Hiding his true feelings” is part of the job.

That’s another advantage Kerry has over Bush, who believes the constituents have to think as he does, even when they don’t.

8

I don’t necessarily conclude that he is hiding his true position, I’m saying you can’t really conclude anything one way or the other about a candidate’s true ideology by what they say when they’re trying to get elected.

In a way, it doesn’t matter. Private opinions don’t really enter into it. It public positions that matter, and those positions matter whether they mean it or not. It’s how they vote that counts, not how they feel about how they vote.

I think that support for civil unions is significantly better than support for anti-gay marriage amendment. Support for full gay marriage would be my ideal, but since neither candidate supports that, I have to go with the one who is at least closest to my position.

Ironically, this is an issue where I think even you would agree more wth Kerry than with Bush.

9

The extremist factions of both parties are the ones who are primarily responsible for getting a candidate nominated. From that point on, each of the candidates must appear more centrist than they actually are as a matter of pure survival. For example, If Bush more aggresively pursued his stance against Roe versus Wade, the risk of a backlash against him would be too much even if he did manage to mobilize his conservative base.

10

Wow…sure have been a LOT of pit threads over the past few months examing what Bush (and Kerry and Cheney etc…) HAVE said in the run up to the election. Lots of threads back in 2000 about Bush and Gore as well during campaign mode.

Lots of wasted bandwidth, I suppose :wink:

That is an entirely reasonable position. It’s entirely reasonably as well to say “I don’t like Kerry’s position on issue X, but I’m still going to vote for him.”

But when other posters (not you) start throwing out terms like “bigot”…or comparing that stance to racism or nazism…surely if a candidate held a BIGOTED or nazi-like position…that would be worth a comment or two from those folks, I would think?

And before I forget…props to stpauler for at least having a consistent position here. :wink:

11

If he truly doesn’t advocate gay marriage (as opposed to faking it to seem more moderate), then maybe it’s a religious thing? Maybe he knows that gay relationships have as much merit as straight ones but he can’t bear to call what they have “marriage” for religious reasons. “Marriage” IS a Christian term anyway, right? I don’t know. If I’m way off feel free to mercilessly shoot me down, but I’m just taking a guess.

12

Yeah, but the way that candidates appear more “centrist” is by the KIND of message they focus on.

They don’t say one message during primary season and take a completely opposite stance during general election season (accusations of Kerry and flip flops aside).

When was the last time Bush mentioned Roe v Wade in a high profile way? It’s not that he’s changed his mind on it…but he’s focusing on a different message (mostly “security” these days).

Kerry is on the record with his stance on civil unions. (thanks to stpauler for the helpful links in the OP…I was too lazy to google Kerry’s specific statements) He’s quite specific, as is Hillary.

I’m truly amazed at the number of folks who are suggesting…“oh, they’re just SAYING that…they don’t really BELIEVE it…” Ergo…they get a pass.

13

Nope, not even remotely. Every culture in the world has some form of marriage, and it’s been around a lot longer than Jesus.

14

Are you ignoring that fact that he has other stances that help mitigate his position on this one issue? Are you ignoring that his actions suggest that whatever his beliefs, there is no reason to believe he would lead a crusade on that issue? Whereas, Bricker does not?

You mean since the RNC?

15

With Kerry it’s impossible to say for certain. How his “Catholic Convictions” come in to play here is difficult to ascertain, as he supports abortion rights and birth control. Most Catholic parishioners do too, on average, but they’re ambivalent about gay-marriage, and appear to be more pro-civil-unions as a kind of compromise. (The official stance of The Church is, of course, quite a bit more strict on these issues) If Kerry is walking the walk as well as talking the talk, he’s basically a mainstream American Catholic. Maybe that makes him a more benign form of bigot, I don’t know.

When I look at Kerry’s voting record, it’s such a tough call. He has consistently voted NO on any kind of abortion restriction, even partial-birth, which puts him way out of line with the position of the Church, and perhaps even out of line with the faithful laity. He’s also voted consistently for embryonic stem cell research, which is another anathema to the Church. Kerry has gone on record as saying that, though he is a man of Faith, he is uncomfortable with the emphasis Bush has put on his own faith during his presidency. His voting record would seem to support this reasonable position; Church and State are separate, after all.

So why is he all-of-the-sudden coming out against gay marriage? Is it political weaseling? Has he finally been pushed to a point where even his convictions of faith must be obeyed? I haven’t the foggiest clue. He’s a bigot or a weasel. If the former, I wouldn’t vote for him under any circumstances. If he’s the latter, unfortunately, he may be taking the only politically viable approach in the current climate, and it may be that the best we can hope for is someone who will, at best, help fend off a national constitutional amendment.

It would be nice to know somehow, though, wouldn’t it.

16

Nope. Let me get this straight though…if Kerry is a bigot, if he is equivalent to a nazi or a racist…his “other stances” give him a pass on being a bigot and a nazi?
I didn’t say one couldn’t vote for him…I DID say if he truly is a bigot and a nazi…that DAMN, that sure seems like something worth mentioning once in awhile

Yes. The general election cycle where he is appealing to the general electorate.

Statements made at the RNC are like Sharpton’s statements at the DNC…meat for the true believers. They tend to not be focused on much once public funding of elections begins,

17

Well, here’s the transcript of the speech. The *closest * he came to mentioning it would fall in this one sentence:

But he didn’t mention it there. Hmm, maybe his website that he mentioned at the RNC would have it. Nope. It states:

Blah, I feel dirty having gone to his website now…but I’m not finding anywhere where he’s mentioned Roe v Wade since the RNC. Am I missing a source?

18

I’m confused as to what you’re trying to accomplish here, beagledave. So, uh, okay, here you go, I’ll say it again:

John Kerry supports a bigoted position on the issue of same-sex marriage. So does Hilary Clinton, if the quote you provided were accurate. So does Bricker, for opposing same-sex marriage and describing civil unions as the only acceptable compromise.

Here’s my solemn pledge to you, beagledave: the moment I hear that John Kerry supports the Third Reich and the genocide of jews, homosexuals, and all unfavorable non-Aryans, I will be the first to come on here and start a thread about it.

I still don’t understand how people can go on record advocating a policy that discriminates against homosexuals just for being homosexual, and then get all indignant when someone tells them that’s a bigoted position. I thought it was supposed to be the gays that were all whiny girly men with a persecution complex. As a reminder, here is a definition of the word “bigot”:

“One’s own group” = Heterosexuals.
“strongly partial” = This is what marriage means, it is exclusive to us.
“intolerant of those who differ” = You do not qualify for this, simply because you are not a heterosexual. And the difference is so profound that we must invent a new term for your relationship rather than have you using our term, even though every other aspect of your relationship is exactly the same.

Ergo, it’s a bigoted position.

Did SolGrundy just say that Bricker is “a bigot?” No. Unless he consistently and systematically shows intolerance for all groups different from his own, then he is not “a bigot.” And unless there’s stuff going on that he hasn’t mentioned on the boards, he’s not a racist or a Nazi either.

So what have we learned from all this? Neither Bricker nor John Kerry is going to be advocating sending gays and Jews to gas chambers anytime soon. Whew. I’m glad that’s finally settled.

19

OK-color me confused. WTF am I supposed to use for an assessment of candidates? If we accept that everything said from day one of a campaign is crap, then why are statements from both candidates constantly being analyzed by the talking heads, and used as cannon fodder on this board?

20

And for the record, it’s not as if this is the shocking revelation that you seem to be implying, beagledave. I’m sure other posters have said it, and I have said on this board previously that John Kerry is clearly and openly anti-gay rights in the form of same sex marriage.

I would post the link here to where I said exactly that, but there’s no way in hell I’d be able to find a single specific post out of all the gay-marriage posts I’ve made on this board.

So John Kerry’s not a hero to homos everywhere. That just proves that this is not a Democrats vs Republicans issue, or a gays vs Catholics issue. Still, it’s extraordinarily unlikely that he’s going to propose a Constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage during his terms, as Bush did. When you have a choice between the guy who’s aiming his gun at you and the guy who’s at the counter buying bullets, you try to get rid of the former and wait until later to worry about the latter.