On December 7, 2003, in an interview with John Roberts of CBS News, Senator Clinton expressed her opposition to same-sex marriage while affirming her support for some form of civil unions for gay couples: "I think that the vast majority of Americans find [gay marriage] to be something they can't agree with. But I think most Americans are fair. And if they believe that people in committed relationships want to share their lives and, not only that, have the same rights that I do in my marriage, to decide who I want to inherit my property or visit me in a hospital, I think that most Americans would think that that's fair and that should be done."[34] But when speaking before conservative or faith-based audiences, Senator Clinton says that she personally is against same-sex marriage on moral and historical grounds.
2007-03-29 05:34:38 · 10 answers · asked by pip 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
In the same interview with Roberts, Clinton expressed opposition to the Federal Marriage Amendment, a proposed constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. "I think that would be a terrible step backwards. It would be the first time we've ever amended the Constitution to deny rights to people. And I think that should be left to the states. You know, I find it hard to believe in one program [health care] I'm agreeing with Newt Gingrich, now I'm about to agree with Dick Cheney. But I think Vice President Cheney's position on gay marriage is the right one."
2007-03-29 05:34:50 · update #1
Clinton supports the Defense of Marriage Act that allows each state to decide whether to recognize a same-sex marriage performed in another state; it also codifies that for federal purposes, only the marriage of one man and one woman is recognized as valid. [36]
Following a 2006 New York State Appeals Court ruling that denied any state constitutional right to same-sex marriage, Clinton reiterated her support for "full equality" under the civil unions mechanism.
2007-03-29 05:35:12 · update #2
In a March 2007 interview with ABC News correspondent Jake Tapper, Clinton said that the U.S. military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy was not working and that openly gay people should be allowed to serve: "We are being deprived of thousands of patriotic men and women who want to serve their country who are bringing skills into the armed services that we desparately need, like translation skills.
2007-03-29 05:35:32 · update #3
In the same interview, when asked if homosexuality is "immoral", she declined to respond: "Well I'm going to leave that to others to conclude."[11] However, later that day, Clinton released a statement regarding US General Peter Pace's comment that homosexual acts are "immoral". She stated: "I disagree with what he said and do not share his view, plain and simple."[12] She went further the following day, stating that "what I believe" is that "homosexuality is not immoral.
2007-03-29 05:36:11 · update #4
map, I was going to email you.. but you don't allow email:
Just putting my money where my mouth is... I ask people to play nice and talk about the issues.. so I'm giving a place for those issues to be talked about.. as best I can.
2007-03-29 05:42:58 · update #5
What do I think? I think Clinton is playing a politician in this issue. She wants to advocate legislation that allows gay/lesbian couples the same rights as marriage but suggests that under her "religious" beliefs that she feels gay marriage is inherently wrong. Obviously this tactic can placate both sides when it comes to votes and it somewhat fails to give her the appearance of a being "solid" candidate. However with that said, being a fixed person within a political issue reflects a conservative myopic view not a person who has the ability to see the whole picture so getting to the bottom line if it gives the gay/lesbian community the outcome that they wish that is in fact a good place to start; sometimes it takes baby steps first.
2007-03-29 05:56:55 · answer #1 · answered by Yemaya 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Perfect example of why I don't care for Hillery. She is a career politician who tries to be all things to all people. her position varies on who she is talking to.
For the record I am straight and I support gay marriage. Telling two people they cannot marry is blatant straight up discrimination. It is no different than telling someone they can't vote because they are black or because they are female.
While it is the purgative of private religious organizations to accept or disapprove of same sex marriages....the government cannot discriminate. In other words; a same sex couple may never be accepted by the catholic church but that is the right of the church. However,thegovernment cannot discriminate like that.
2007-03-29 05:55:07 · answer #2 · answered by supertamsf 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think she is heading in the right direction on this issue, I think civil unions will be just as good. I mean gay people should have the right to inherit each other in death etc... I think at some point in the near future gay people will beable to marry. Why Should we Discriminate??? When two people come together and love each other they wanna know that it will be for life.
2007-03-29 06:01:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Bottom line, our country wasn't founded on it. We came here for freedom of religion. If you look at religion, it doesn't encompass same-sex marriage, so I actually AGREE with Clinton. No Marriage. Civil Legal Union only for inheritance purposes like she said. What the &*(*(( is wrong with me? Agreeing with Hillary? Wow. This is a first and proof that I am growing as a human.
2007-03-29 05:40:15 · answer #4 · answered by LaDonnaMarie 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
As I keep in mind, her husband signed the protection of Marriage Act back in 1996 and on the on the spot she stated that she agreed with it. She stated that marriage is between a guy and a woman. i believe that many interior the gay community are leaning in the route of Dennis Kucinich, because he's the candidate maximum obviously -- maximum overtly -- in opt for of gay marriage.
2016-12-02 23:35:26 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Clintons, as bright, educated, thinking people, know that gay people should not be discriminated against and should have all the rights and privileges of hetero's. However- since they are in politics, they watch their words carefully so as not to offend the major religious base, a portion of whom she needs to get elected.
You need to get elected in order to implement your good policies- so I'll give Hillary a break on this one. She's saying what she needs to say.
2007-03-29 05:40:00 · answer #6 · answered by Morey000 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm against Clinton (for other reasons) but have no problem with gay marriage.
2007-03-29 05:52:11 · answer #7 · answered by Ricky T 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Too much political calculation and too little heart.I don't like her stance at all mainly because she fails to take a real stand for what's right and what she believes and knows is right in my opinion
2007-03-29 05:40:19 · answer #8 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It beats some of the other candidates positions.Flip flops but that's what politicians do. That's all Im gonna say.
2007-03-29 05:38:13 · answer #9 · answered by Da Man 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What exactly is your point in all of these questions?
2007-03-29 05:39:27 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋