Cheney Backs Gay Relationships

[bfp]

Cheney Backs 'Freedom' for Gay Relationships
Tue Aug 24 2004 16:25:16 ET

During a rally in Davenport, Iowa on Tuesday, Vice President Dick Cheney was asked by a woman "What do you think about homosexual marriage?"

"Lynne and I have a gay daughter, so it's an issue our family is very familiar with. 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.

"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."

Cheney then went on to blast the courts for interfering in the matter and not allowing for the states to decide the issue:

"I think his perception was that the courts, in effect, were beginning to change, without allowing the people to be involved. The courts were making the judgment for the entire country."

wow i wasn't expecting that

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by bfp

Cheney Backs 'Freedom' for Gay Relationships
Tue Aug 24 2004 16:25:16 ET

During a rally in Davenport, Iowa on Tuesday, Vice President Dick Cheney was asked by a woman "What do you think about homosexual marriage?"

"Lynne and I have a gay daughter, so it's an issue our family is very familiar with. 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.

"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."

Cheney then went on to blast the courts for interfering in the matter and not allowing for the states to decide the issue:

"I think his perception was that the courts, in effect, were beginning to change, without allowing the people to be involved. The courts were making the judgment for the entire country."

So he respects their right to exist and not be imprisoned but does not want them to have any protection/rights under the law? Oh, how generous of him...

Now, if he wants the states to make the decision and "blasts" the courts for interfering, then how on Earth is it that he can back a Constitutional Amendment? This makes no sense at all.

Oh, and as a final note, Dick Cheney very clearly stated in 2000 that gay marriage was a state's issue. He has no admittedly "flip-flopped" on the issue to back the president. Where's the "liberal media" on that one???

[Satchel]

Someone needs to phone all those South Carolina voters and make sure they know Cheney has a gay daughter

[kezarmyaj]

would this make cheney a flip flopper?

[Adam D]

Oddly enough, that's the same position a lot of Dems took and they were trashed on by Republicans for avoiding the issue.



Huh, how 'bout that.

[bfp]

Oddly enough, that's the same position a lot of Dems took and they were trashed on by Republicans for avoiding the issue.



Huh, how 'bout that.

Actually, there were some that argued that there needs to be an amendment, and there were other conservatives that backed the 'states rights' issue. Every single conservative didn't stand on one side of the argument.

The problem about leaving it to the states today is that the supreme court would prob treat this just as they did with the Texas sodomy case. They made it a national issue, not a states issue. If this case is brought to the supreme court, they just may make this a national issue as well.

[Adam D]

Originally Posted by bfp

Actually, there were some that argued that there needs to be an amendment, and there were other conservatives that backed the 'states rights' issue. Every single conservative didn't stand on one side of the argument.

The problem about leaving it to the states today is that the supreme court would prob treat this just as they did with the Texas sodomy case. They made it a national issue, not a states issue. If this case is brought to the supreme court, they just may make this a national issue as well.

Actually, it was the defendents who made it a national issue because they believed the sodomy laws violated their U.S. Constitutional rights.

Originally Posted by kezarmyaj

would this make cheney a flip flopper?

He advocated that the issue should be left to the states to decide in 2000 and did so again recently.

I believe he was saying that the courts made the decision for MA (and the rest of the country by virtue of Full Faith and Credit) - and that decision took away the right of the people of MA (and the rest of the US by virtue of Full Faith and Credit) to decide for themselves.

That a consistent position.

Originally Posted by bfp

If this case is brought to the supreme court, they just may make this a national issue as well.

No issue is taken up by the Supreme Court that is not a matter of federal law (or conflict between states).

Originally Posted by Adam D

Actually, it was the defendents who made it a national issue because they believed the sodomy laws violated their U.S. Constitutional rights.

The case did not say that states couldn't prohibit sodomy. It did however suggest it in dicta.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by xiannaix

He advocated that the issue should be left to the states to decide in 2000 and did so again recently.

I believe he was saying that the courts made the decision for MA (and the rest of the country by virtue of Full Faith and Credit) - and that decision took away the right of the people of MA (and the rest of the US by virtue of Full Faith and Credit) to decide for themselves.

That a consistent position.

Uh, so he says "I support the states' right to make this decision, but I also support the president in his position" (which is to pass an amendment to take the decision away from the states. There is no way you can rationally argue that this is consistent. It doesn't even make sense. As you all have said so many times about Kerry, you can't have it both ways.

Originally Posted by Ryan

Uh, so he says "I support the states' right to make this decision, but I also support the president in his position" (which is to pass an amendment to take the decision away from the states. There is no way you can rationally argue that this is consistent. It doesn't even make sense. As you all have said so many times about Kerry, you can't have it both ways.

I've never said that about Kerry. I certainly think it - but I haven't said it here.

Regarding Cheney. The question was his consistency - he's held the same point of view throughout. I agree that it is odd to say you support some one who advocates a different pov on a clear cut question. And, on that he's open to criticism - he's straddling.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by xiannaix

I've never said that about Kerry. I certainly think it - but I haven't said it here.

Regarding Cheney. The question was his consistency - he's held the same point of view throughout. I agree that it is odd to say you support some one who advocates a different pov on a clear cut question. And, on that he's open to criticism - he's straddling.

He's definitely straddling. I do understand how difficult his position is and I must say I respect him on some level for not lying about his personal belief. On the other hand, he is admittedly going against his own principles to support Bush here. I think it illustrates once again that Bush is out of the mainstream not only for America in general but for the GOP. But hey, he's not the other guy so we stick with what they give us, right?

Originally Posted by Ryan

He's definitely straddling. I do understand how difficult his position is and I must say I respect him on some level for not lying about his personal belief. On the other hand, he is admittedly going against his own principles to support Bush here. I think it illustrates once again that Bush is out of the mainstream not only for America in general but for the GOP. But hey, he's not the other guy so we stick with what they give us, right?

Do you have a quote of Cheney saying "I believe X but support the Pres. in his opposition to X"?

As for mainstream.... how is GW out? In his support of amendment or his opposition to changing the definition of marriage?