Should Democrats vote to oppose a ban on gay marraige?

Question

I'm a Democrat but not a liberal. Personally I think voting to oppose a ban on same sex marraige is a political blunder on the part of the Dem party. If they vote against the ban and Repubs vote for it then gay marraige and values becomes an election year issue. If Dems vote with Republicans to ban gay marraige then it takes the entire issue off the table. Gay people will still vote Dem because they so desperately hate Bush and the corrupt Republican party. The thing is there are simply much more important life and death issues to consider before you ever get to whether or not a man should marry a man. I'm insensed that people have voted Bush to ensure that gays wont marry but now complain that their son is dead in Iraq or they can no longer buy prescription drugs because they are too expensive or complain about gas prices or that minimum wage hasnt moved in 5 years. Well, they should of paid closer attention to the true issues that effect our lives.
oh..and Gays..marraige is4man, wom

Answer 1

There are so many important issues to vote for in this country. Gay Marriage or any variation on this theme is little more than a peurile diversion from the real issues. Who a person marries should be of no business to anyone other than the people getting married. There are those who say that "marriage" is an institution that exists and should exist only between man and woman, but how this becomes a political issue I have NO idea.

I was always under the impression that marriage was something that occurred between two people who love each other; though I suppose that it's also a convenient way for a woman who gets knocked up to insure that her children are born "legitimate" and so I suppose ultimately, this is something that can only happen between reproductively viable men and women, so by this logic,
"marriage" at least in word form should be something that is ONLY available to sexually promiscuous and fertile straight people. But that's just me.

I think that rather than voting on what essentially boils down to restricting human rights and tax-payer rights in this country, Democrats AND Republicans should vote for things that will bring our conflicts in Iraq and Afghanastan to a reasonable close; we should be focused on issues of education and healtcare, the financial burden that this country has shouldered, and rectifying the horrendous (and costly) blunders the current President and his administration have so brazenly committed.

Why we are even obsessing over who's doin' whom just shows that maybe in the arena of global politics and global culture, America has backslid horrendously, and given a few more years of this kind of debate, we'll just fragment even more than we are and wind up becoming a massive third world religious caliphate that ultimately becomes a curious footnote in global history.

Answer 2

The Democrats should work on a bi-partisan effort to reach the moderate Republicans to abstain from voting. If voting itself is a catch-22 situation then they should make it possible to abstain from voting while making sure this ban will not pass. This ban is a waste of national resources that would be better served on more important issues like safeguarding our constitutional rights. So, I think if the Democrats diplomatically sought out enough Republicans to abstain from this vote, then this could become a non-issue.

Frankly, anyone who is that opposed to gay marriage does not have their priorities right. Would you take the food out of your children's mouths just to ensure that a gay person does not marry? Any talk of the corrupting influences of gay marriage on American society or culture is useless when there is no future generation to pass our way of life on to.

However, if the Republicans insist on making this an issue then the Democrats need to show some courage and vote against it because whatever the negative impact of that nay vote is, the ban itself is a symbol of the legislature focusing on non-essential issues instead of dealing with the widespread corruption and bureaucratic inefficiency of the federal government. If the Republicans try to villify that nay vote, then the Democrats should villify the Republicans for not caring enough about the impact of an expensive and incompetently handled war, unnecessary pay-offs to oil companies, illegal campaign practices, pay-offs to drug companies, their fumbling of the new medicare system, lack of support for education, etc. Honestly, there is way more material for the Democrats to make much of when it comes to the Republicans. It's just that Republicans are good at making a lot of noise over small stuff-- they're like some high strung French poodle that way.

Answer 3

people should vote how they feel not what party they are in.
This is why this country is going to ****.
We are quote on quote free thinkers yet we join a party of like minds and feel we have to go along with them.

If you are for the banning of gay marriages vote yes, if you are against vote no.
I know some republicans that are voting to NOT ban, and some democrats voting to ban.

Vote what you think should happen, i mean it is your vote!

"If they vote against the ban and Repubs vote for it then gay marraige and values becomes an election year issue. If Dems vote with Republicans to ban gay marraige then it takes the entire issue off the table. Gay people will still vote Dem because they so desperately hate Bush and the corrupt Republican party."
thats terribly ignorant. Banning someones marriage just to get it off the table is the stupidest thing i've ever heard. While it shouldnt be the biggest issue it shouldn't be just shafted to get rid of it. and the gays will vote no because they want to get married not to spite some party or person, you are terribly ignorant and your right to vote should be taken away.

Answer 4

No. Gay marriage is one way to handle one of the more pressing issues Americans face but have not realized in general. The prices of housing has made the nuclear family ideal a thing of the past.
Now to buy and finance a home in almost any metropolitan area requires some arrangements between friends, lovers, brothers, sisters and lonesome uncles or any number of combinations of people to pay the mortgage payment.
In part, same-sex marriage is one of these hybrid families that want to live the American Dream of owning a home with all the encumbrances and rewards.
America should take a closer look at the reality we live in before making judgments about others. Sometimes things are not what they seem, and usually things are more than appearance.
Creative families are what is happening out there in our world. How else do you accommodate the legitimate needs of our citizens but to allow, embrace the notion of a creative family unit to meet a new social, economic realities?

Answer 5

Remember, it was Clinton, supported by both Republicans and the majority of Democrats, who passed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. See attached senate roll call of vote.

So, the Dems already voted to support traditional marriage.

Therefore, your statement about voting for Bush to stop homosexual marriages is absurd at any level. Same with the never-supported statement that the Republicans are corrupt (or any more corrupt than the Dems), or the economic illiteracy shown by blaming the price of drugs or gas on the government.

Answer 6

You are what is wrong whit the political system.A real leader doesn't put politics above ethics.Or strategy above principal.
We have Gay marriage in Belgium and Holland also have it.It ensures Gay couples of certain legal rights and gives them a way to express their love in a formal setting.It is working fine ,no problem.
Opposing Gay marriage will secure some political gain but puts you on the wrong side of history at the end.
Someday it will exist and the sooner the better.
Everyone needs a chance to build a loving caring relationship.

Answer 7

Yes, they should vote against the ban, not because of politics but because it's important. It would be a huge rotten sore on the history of the US if we acutally amended the constitution to ensure that certain people have certain rights TAKEN AWAY rather than granting/guaranteeing rights which is what the constitution is supposed to do. So any decent human being should vote against the ban.

Answer 8

Well I dont think gays should be allowed to marry, As for your mimum wage that would drive prices higher so what is the point. I have not seen a democrat policy yet that makes any sence past the issue itself. They dont look at what it will cause in the long run.

Answer 9

Yes they should vote against it. Another point you are right on: this is such a trivial issue it is hardly worth speaking about.

But democrats love issues such as these. Also the amount of water in a toilet was a big one for them.

It keeps them from haviing to debate important issues and proving they are fools and have no answers on anything important.

God, liberal democrats are idiots.

Answer 10

Nobody should vote to ban gay marriage!! There is no reason to ban it!! Everybody should be allowed to marry the person they love!!
Who are you to say that marriage is only for a man and a woman, are you God?? If God made people gay then why wouldn't he want them to get married??