Cheney professes true libertarian view on Gay Marriage

[Perky]

http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0609/cheney_on_gay_marriage_3c1bbf10-64bb-474a-99f7-5d6d5909b99e.html

This is they type of thing that has to gobsmack the slackjaws on Freeperville

[bdamomma]

1. I didn't watch but it is because his daughter is gay.

[Fresh_Start]

2. Of course it is,

because he doesn't have an iota of concern for anyone else

[Perky]

3. He is basically saying that anyone who want to marry should have that right

But doesn't want a federal law because it is a state issue not a federal one.

[marshall]

46. Ironically that's a more liberal view than Obama's

Obama says he believes marriage should be between a man and a woman, but that states ultimately have the say so.

[Zavulon]

63. +1

My thoughts exactly.

[Irreverend IX]

23. I doubt that Bush, Cheney or anyone in their inner circle...

Give two shits about gay marriage, abortion, prayer in schools or any other culture war issues. They gave lip service to "traditional values" because it got votes from the knuckledraggers, but now they don't care.

[ZombieHorde]

4. Wow, Cheney came out for gay marriage before Obama did.

Embarrassing.

[LostinVA]

8. It certainly doesn't look good, and it makes me wonder if they're doing it on purpose

At least Cheney.

[masuki bance]

37. What do you mean?

August 25th, 2004-

"...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.
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here

“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...."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5817720/

[vaberella]

10. Huh...Obama said he supported civil unions.

And he's said, I believe, that partners should have the same benefits of marriage through the civil unions as in seeing their loved one in the hospital or being put on the health insurance. I just think O prefers to say "civil unions" rather than marriage.

[ruggerson]

17. Separate but equal

not cool. Obama is better than Cheney on 99 out of 100 positions.

Not, however, on this.

[Hieronymus]

61. Yes, Obama doesn't support gay marriage.

[jonnyblitz]

62. "I think O prefers to say civil unions rather than marriage."

OH PLEASE give me a motherFUCKING BREAK!!! you O-POLOGISTS are getting truly fucking PATHETIC. :rofl: :puke:

[SemiCharmedQuark]

16. He didn't come out for gay marriage, he came out against a federal ban on gay marriage

Something Obama has already done. And that position is woefully inadequate, no matter who holds it.

[ruggerson]

18. actually today he came out for same sex marriage

he said he supported it if states wished to do it.

[onenote]

20. has obama said he's opposed to states allowing same sex marriage?

[ruggerson]

24. Obama has said marriage is between "a man and a woman"

and he does not support same sex marriage.

He has said instead he supports civil unions.

[onenote]

27. but didn't he come out against Prop 8?

Admittedly, his position is somewhat contradictory - he has said he personally doesn't support same sex marriage, but as I recall he also opposes not only a federal ban on gay marriage but also state bans.

Cheney's position is also seemingly contradictory. He seems to be saying he's for allowing same sex marriage but he also doesn't seem to take a position objecting to states adopting bans.

[vaberella]

29. He did.

He wrote against prop 8 and he spoke out publicly about it. Obama is not contradictory. What it is, is that his use of civil unions instead of marriage. That's the only thing. However he's 100% for Gay rights. And where has he said he doesn't support same sex marriage? That's not the case. He says he believes marriage is between a man and a woman and here he's focusing on the biblical text. However, he also states that civil unions should have the same rights as marriages by law. That's the thing, he's playing on marriage and civil unions. On that I saw it as just trying to maintain the conservative votes he had. Nothing more there but all in all he supports gay rights. Even when reps from the LGBT came over he was ready to get legislation they were going to vote on to get passed because he supports them a great deal and the reps even said they were very excited and hopeful. That was about 2 months ago.

[ruggerson]

31. He opposes discrimination being written into state's constitutions

but does not support same sex marriage. He supports civil unions. Matter of fact, when asked about CIVIL marriage, he repeatedly returns to his religious belief, thus conflating the two things and confusing the issue. What his faith has to do with civil marriage, no reporter has yet asked.

[QC]

33. And apparently the only issue influenced by his religion is marriage equality.

It's funny how Christianity, as he sees it, seems to have little or nothing to say about things like war and peace, justice, wealth distribution, human rights, etc., but when the subject turns to marriage, then "God is in the mix" and this learned, cosmopolitan man suddenly favors a crudely literalistic approach to Scripture shared by no serious theologian of the past century.

Funny how that works, isn't it?

I could respect it if he said, "Look, the public is just not ready for full equality, but here's something that I can do for you now, in the meantime." That's one thing. But suddenly turning into a Southern Baptist every time this one issue comes up is just patronizing.

[RufusH]

49. That's a really good point. War? Ok. Torture? Ok. Divorce? Ok. Gays Marrying. Not ok.

How ridiculous that our president ONLY is against equal marriage, and not fully against any of those other things.

[QC]

59. I guess God is not in the mix when we're talking helping the poor.

Oh wait....

41"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'

44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'

45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

[rvablue]

26. No, he's stated the exact opposite.

He has said the issue of gay marriage should be decided on the state level.

And he is also on record as being opposed to a national ban.

[vaberella]

30. Yup, and

from what I remember he believes Gay couples should have the same rights as married couples especially in cases of hospital visits.

[LostinVA]

52. Separate but equal

[vaberella]

57. I used that as an example...

All he didn't use was the name marriage. I don't call if the name as the most significant thing...unless the name is means most to you?

[onenote]

21. delete dupe

[Honeycombe8]

38. Well, no. He never used the word "marriage." nt

[sarah553807]

36. where was this 1,000 days ago?

he's a little to late in my book.

[Honeycombe8]

41. Did you watch the Dem. debates during the campaign? He made his position clear,

as did the other candidates.

He said clearly he was personally not in favor of gay marriage, but that he against a constitutional amendment banning it. I think he said it should be up to the states.

Similar to what Cheney just said.

Note that even though someone may be personally against something, that doesn't mean they don't recognize that others should have the choice to make those decisions for themselves. I believe that is his view on abortion, as well. Same as Kerry's was, Mario Cuomo's view, etc.

Example: As a woman, I may be personally against abortion and choose not to get one ever. But that doesn't necessarily translate into meaning that I think everyone should hold MY personal views on it.

Although why what he thinks on the subject matters at all. What matters is what he does or doesn't do regarding a federal consitutional amendment, and he has said he'd veto it, if ever presented to him.

[sarah553807]

50. Misunderstanding,I'm sorry

I was trying to reply to the OP,not you.I was describing Cheney's reaction as of late,not obama.

[Bleacher Creature]

5. President Obama needs to take a stand -- now.

There is no way in HELL that he can allow Dick Cheney and Ted Olson to be better on this issue than he is. Seriously, that's just embarassing.

And in case it's not obvious, Dick Cheney is still a monster who has done more to harm this country than just about anyone is its history. This one change of the piece of coal lodged in his body in the vicinity of his heart does nothing to change this fact.

[vaberella]

9. Huh? Obama already has a stance on Gay marriage and basically Gay Rights.

I don't see what you're getting at. He's working on DADT. While he was a candidate he publicly spoke out against prop 8 in California and even wrote a letter to the judiciary officials in California to shut that debacle down. However, he always said the states should have jurisdiction over their laws (while the Supreme court should play a minimalist approach in those things). He has always stated that he supports civil unions and never said anything against it.


I'm trying to understand your point. There's only two reasons why you would imply Obama has no stance on LGBT is because you either are not listening, choose not to listen, or haven't bothered to inform yourself.

[ej510]

13. I agree we should dispose the word marriage from government and

call all unions civil unions. Marriage is a religious word. You are marred in the eye of the lord, but contractually obligated through your state government. Problem solved.

[LostinVA]

14. "Marriage" isn't a religious word, it's a legal term

Religions have co-opted it.

[QC]

22. That stance is separate but equal.

Not good enough.

[vaberella]

28. Actually I don't agree.

I really don't. Everything in O's background says that he supports gay rights 100% all their rights. All he does is use terminology in order not to mess with conservatives. He was friends with Wright who was a massive supporter of Gay Rights, so much so that Wright had a singles night for them. Secondly, he's never said that he wasn't supportive of them having the same rights as married couples. All he's said really is played on the nuance between marriage and civil unions. But he's never denied gays any rights.


If you can point to me where he's said specifically what Gay's should have or not then okay. But actually he had a strong gay following because he promised them a lot and he's working on DADT. And as I mentioned he publicly spoke out against prop 8 as a candidate and went as far as to write to their judicial committee over there to express his feelings on the matter. Once again...everyone would like to think he believes in separate but equal because he's been said not to stop the continued actions under DADT and various other things but he's already said that he's wanting to pass national laws that need to be followed that supports gay rights 100%.

I'm going by what I've read during the campaigns and his own personal promises once president---not making stuff up based on interpretation that at times can be wrong. Check out the post now on why Obama didn't release the pics...now it seems to be because Maliki stated that Iraqi's would go wild and what I implied to be probable civil war. So all this thing that O is a liar has a lot going on. There's a lot behind the scenes we don't know about and we'll get it in drips.

[QC]

32. "he promised them a lot"

Yes, he promised us a lot. No doubt about that.

Civil unions are separate but equal. Period. There's no way to finesse that. I can understand why many would feel the need to, since Obama's backwardness on this subject is so embarrassing, and so at odds with his enlightenment (and legal knowledge) on other issues, but there we have it. Setting up some special institution for the homos says, pretty damn openly, in fact, that the homos aren't worthy of the real thing.

[Honeycombe8]

39. Reasonable people can, and do, differ in their opinions on that. But to be correct,

Obama has never said he's against gay marriage legally. He has said that he personally is not in favor it. He said something similar about abortion. As did Kerry, Cuomo, and many others.

One can be "personally" against something, but think that others having the choice to do it should be legal.

[QC]

40. I do not think that reasonable people can disagree on basic human rights. n/t

[Honeycombe8]

42. Reasonable minds differ on whether gay marriage is a civil/human rights issue. nt

[QC]

43. I disagree. Bigots are not reasonable people. n/t

[Honeycombe8]

45. I disagree. People who disagree with you are not automatically bigots, any more

than you are a jerk for not agreeing with them.

Reasonable people can disagree on certain issues. Reasonable people don't digress into name-calling and "Oh, yeah? Well, your mama wears army boots! Take that!" when they run out of reasonable arguments.

[QC]

47. People who believe that some groups of people should be subjected to discrimination are bigots.

Period.

It's not a matter of whether they agree with me or not.

Reasonable people can and do disagree on many issues, but basic human rights are not one of those.

[LostinVA]

54. People against civil/equal rights ARE bigots

[Starry Messenger]

44. Uh, no.

Equal rights should be reasonable. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to think again.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

48. No, reasonable minds can't differ on it

Reasonable people will recognize equal rights are a civil/human rights issue.

[LostinVA]

51. Well, no they actually can't -- it's a civil/human right

[ruggerson]

60. no, actually you're wrong and you're the problem n/t

[LostinVA]

53. Yup, no matter how people try to sugarcoat it

[Bleacher Creature]

34. Putting aside your last comment, I do agree that my response was a bit flippant.

I fully realize that there's not much you can (or should) do on a federal level to legalize gay marriage, other than to appoint decent people to the Supreme Court (that said, why should the Supreme Court play any more of a minimalist approach to the issue than it did in Loving v. VA?). I also realize that there's a (lessening) political risk (without much benefit) for the President to come out in support of marriage equality. He hasn't, and has specifically said that he opposes gay marriage.

All that being said, I agree that his position isn't that much different than Dick Cheney's. My post was largely a measure of my frustration with the Administration's clear, yet subtle, back-peddling on a couple of key issues, namely DADT and DOMA. He has until the end of this month to decide whether to respond to GLAD's challenge to DOMA, and it will be a revealing moment.

I'll be honest, I have and will support this President to the end of the earth and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he'll get it right at the end. I also know that there are other, HUGE issues out there for him to spend his time and political capital on -- at least for now. As a straight, white guy, I also realize that it's easy for me to say "wait", as much as I know that it's wrong. But at the end of the day, a transformative leader does need to do what's right. I just hope that he does it sooner, rather than later.

[Number23]

35. That's THREE reasons, vabie

There's only two reasons why you would imply Obama has no stance on LGBT is because you either are not listening, choose not to listen, or haven't bothered to inform yourself.

:pals:

[yellowcanine]

6. As usual Cheney is less than honest, though. He says "let the states regulate it" but he knows darn

well that won't work because his wing nut buddies will not allow it. They don't want any states to recognize gay marriage because in essence all states will eventually have to recognize it if that happens. He knows the money pours in from around the country when a state has a referendum on the issue.

[LostinVA]

7. He has a gay daughter he's close to -- makes a world of difference

Even to Sith Lords.

[4lbs]

11. Yet, that's not the one we've been seeing on TV. The gay daughter is busying herself

with community outreach programs.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

15. LOL! I wasn't expecting the 2nd part of your reply. nt

[HopeOverFear]

12. Don't fall for it...Cheney's trying to take advantage of the furor over DADT

to win the gay vote in 2010 and 2012...don't fall for it...

[Cha]

25. Yeah, and WTF do we even have to have

cheney campaigning on tv all over the place, now?

[LostinVA]

55. I actually think the evil SOB means it

[ObamaKerryDem]

58. Yes, exactly. It's all done to try and undermine the current administration.

Never mind the fact that Cheney's own administration did the exact opposite of what he is now claiming to stand for.

What a hypocrite!

[VespertineIconoclast]

64. Agreed. Why didn't he have all this support when he could have done something about it.

Here's a nice little article about it: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=41013

Dick Cheney: Pro-gay marriage...too late to matter by Joe Garofoli

Some heads are spinning with news that Dick Cheney is gay-marriage friendly now that well...now that it doesn't mean much what he thinks. Surely you heard that Dick said this week that he has "no problem" with gay marriage. Oh really? Just four years ago Dick was half of a presidential ticket that jacked up fear of gay marriage to help put anti-gay marriage measures on the ballots in 11 states and boost the GOP turnout. That's when it mattered what he thought.

....

Gay advocates are wondering where this Dick was four years ago. Or even last year when his opinion as the No.2 guy the country (OK, OK, No. 1 in some eyes) would have mattered.

....

Dick isn't the only conflicted Cheney when comes to gay politics. Here's Mary Cheney trying to pitch her book in 2006. Dave asks her why she didn't talk about gay rights during the campaign -- when she was a campaign officer AND IT MATTERED --- instead of afterwards when she was trying to make money on a book.

...snip

I find it rather disappointing how quickly DUers believe that what Cheney has to say has any relevance in anything now. Cheney was able to make TORTURE "legal" during his reign in the White House but it was too difficult to find the time to give gays equal rights and the right to marry since he is such an obvious gay rights advocate?! Give me a break! He can say whatever he wants to now because he is trying his damnedest to undermine the current administration.

[Shrek]

19. This isn't new

He said the same thing in the 2004 debate against John Edwards.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

56. He is selfish. If his daughter weren't gay he would advocate our hanging.

I'm glad he said it so that Freeper heads will explode, but it doesn't make me like him any better.

[Orsino]

65. Cheney claims to support marriage equality.

Therefore, he doesn't.

The man is no longer capable of telling the truth, or even of recognizing it.

[Hellataz]

66. I don't think Cheney was ever the evangelical politician like Bush, Cheney was all about power

Cheney used the religious right to further his agenda, deep down i don't think he cares one way or another about social issues, as long as they don't get in the way of his agenda for gaining more money and power. Him coming out to support gay marriage is just a way to stick it to Obama's popularity.