What Are McCain's Views On Gays?

[sunoftheskye]

I think I heard him recently throw around the term "special rights" when referring to gay people, though I'm 99.9% certain he did an Advocate Newsmagazine on camera interview not too long ago. I know he didn't support gay marriage but he seemed at least tolerant.

I can't deal with waiting another 8 years to be legally protected in the fucking workplace and gay people still being idiotically discharged from the military.

 

[construct]

He supports DADT.

 

[justgofaster]

I think pretty much all Republicans hate gay people. McCain attacked Romney in Florida, claiming Romney, "told gay organizers in Massachusetts he would be a stronger advocate for special rights than even Ted Kennedy."

McCain helped get Arizona to pass a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and opposed hate crimes legislation because it would have protected gays.

"Mitt Romney thinks he can fool us. He supported abortion on demand, even allowed a law mandating taxpayer-funding for abortion. He says he changed his mind, but he still hasn't changed the law. He told gay organizers in Massachusetts he would be a stronger advocate for special rights than even Ted Kennedy. Now, it's something different."

-John McCain

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/29/mccain-accused-of-gay-bai_n_83843.html

 

[Kulindahr]

He supports DADT.

All I ask is that he change one letter, and make it DADC: Don't Ask, Don't Care.

 

[syntax]

Whatever will get him elected.

 

[AsianDream]

I think I heard him recently throw around the term "special rights" when referring to gay people, though I'm 99.9% certain he did an Advocate Newsmagazine on camera interview not too long ago. I know he didn't support gay marriage but he seemed at least tolerant.

I can't deal with waiting another 8 years to be legally protected in the fucking workplace and gay people still being idiotically discharged from the military.

McCain campaigned to pass the marriage ban in Arizona and starred in two television advertisements supporting the ban.

He also strongly opposed hate crimes legislation that would have protected gays and lesbians.

He is fully in favour of the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" ban on gays in the military. One quote from him in this area is "The national security of the United States would be put at grave risk if homosexuality was openly expressed in the military".

In an interview with Jerry Falwell he said that he would back a constitutional ban if state laws prohibiting gay marriage failed to be introduced.

In summary - McCain is a Republican - what other views could he hold?

 

[MystikWizard]

Don't necessarily think all Republicans "hate" gays. But when you are a politician, you pander your personal views for the views of the people you represent.

 

[Spensed]

Lots of gay guys seem in denial about this, but McCain is strongly anti-gay:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/mccain-gay-issues

Make no doubt about it, a Supreme Court of McCain nominees would roll gay rights back into the Dark Ages.

If gay rights matter to you, McCain's not your man. Just saying.

 

[LaloGS]

Repuglicans only want special rights for Repuglicans.

How many of you guys who support them and are openly gay feel you get a fair chance in the party to voice your opinions?

Speak up. . . I know you're out there hiding in your Repuglican closets:

 

[aab91030]

I certainly hope people aren't voting solely on a candidate's views on gay rights. It's hardly the most important issue facing the US right now.

 

[Spensed]

^ It is sometimes the most important issue to a gay individual, who wants to get married, or serve in the military, or stop his non-US partner from being deported, etc., etc. And to those individuals that care about victims of anti-gay discrimination.

Plus where someone stands on gay rights is a bellwether for many other characteristics, e.g. respect for individual rights and differences, tolerance, etc.

An anti-gay Supreme Court is likely to be an extremely unpleasant experience for many people, favoring corporate and big business over personal rights, issuing socially reactionary judgements, allowing religion into politics, etc.

Obviously, there are other, and sometimes more important, issues in play. But IMHO that's no excuse for subordinating gay rights and interests.

 

[sunoftheskye]

I certainly hope people aren't voting solely on a candidate's views on gay rights. It's hardly the most important issue facing the US right now.

That is such a stupid thing to say. Who in here stated they're only voting based on that one issue?

Why is it no one makes a comment like this when discussing the economy, or health care, or the war in Iraq?

When you can actually be fired from your job just for being gay, in most states in the U.S., yes--it's very important to a lot of people.

When you can actually get discharged from the military just because someone finds out you're gay, yes it's important to a lot of people AND their families.

 

[smirnoff-ice]

I certainly hope people aren't voting solely on a candidate's views on gay rights. It's hardly the most important issue facing the US right now.

this is the most stupid thing i've ever read.

being pro-gay doesn't exclude that a president and his team can work on other topics too, at the same time... ever heard of multi-tasking?


about mccain i heard that he is the same stupid social-hardcore conservative as thompson has been, only difference is he is pro-choice.

and even if mccain was a bit more liberal, as soon as huckabee gets his nomination for vice-president i see bad bad bad bad times to come for gays.

 

[Jannus]

I certainly hope people aren't voting solely on a candidate's views on gay rights. It's hardly the most important issue facing the US right now.

Yeah, you wouldn't want a person's opposition to basic human rights influencing whether or not that person became president of the United States.

 

[Jannus]

Don't necessarily think all Republicans "hate" gays. But when you are a politician, you pander your personal views for the views of the people you represent.

Failure to support the human rights of any group is a form of hatred against that group. It doesn't matter whether or not you are up for election to some office, nor whom your constituent electorate may be. You can spin it as you please, but it is hatred, pure and simple.

 

[aab91030]

this is the most stupid thing i've ever read.

being pro-gay doesn't exclude that a president and his team can work on other topics too, at the same time... ever heard of multi-tasking?

Of course "being pro-gay" doesn't mean that a president can't do other things. I'm just saying that making that the primary criterion for one's vote is about as intelligent as people who vote for a candidate simply because he's pro-life irrespective of the candidate's positions on other issues.

As to the rest of the comments in this thread...

McCain is pro-life.

McCain may pander, but he panders less than any of the candidates right now. He's embraced unpopular positions and been honest about it. Remember that immigration bill two years ago? There's a reason he doesn't have much of a Republican or conservative base, and it may come back to bite him.

I understand the concern that another Republican in the White House may not be the best news for gays, but it's worth remembering that most of the laws that affect us are made at the state level. Furthermore, what did eight years of Bill Clinton get us?

 

[construct]

Furthermore, what did eight years of Bill Clinton get us?

Eight years of Bill Clinton got us DADT, DOMA, and Hillary--each one a seriously mixed bag. But McCain would be far, far worse.

 

[Spensed]

Easy to forget how bad the Reagan years were for gays.

Bill Clinton was the most pro-gay President in US history.

Although even he admitted that Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell was a poor compromise at the start of his Presidency, it was still much better the previous policy.

Plus Clinton

- ended AIDS discrimation (or, at least, got legislation through with that goal),

- made gay-bashing a hate crime,

- appointed out gays to public office,

- appointed Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer and many progressive judges. Ginsburg and Breyer were instrumental in the case that, in effect, finally permitted gay sex between consenting adults.

Could Clinton have done more for gays? Sure he could have. But he still provided an era of pro-gay progress that deserves some acknowledgement and gratitude.

 

[construct]

Bill Clinton was the most pro-gay President in US history.

I don't deny that.

Now.

As I was saying, McCain would be far, far worse than Bill.

Even if you attribute all the disappointments of the Clinton presidency to Hillary, McCain would be so much worse. The disappointments that would certainly come with a second Clinton presidency would be merely annoying.

A similar line of argument should be made for Obama.

Threatening to vote Republican or to stay home because one doesn't like the Democratic nominee is absurd when faced with someone like John McCain.

 

[Xpione]

He has been flip flopping on this issue. But presently, he doesn't believe in may marriage, but he believes in civil union, and he believes state should decide the issue.