In a rare agreement in the recent VP debate, both Biden and Palin stated that neither support same-sex marriage. Where they differed is where Biden stated the support for similar benefits and rights as married couples, while Palin skirted the issue and reiterated her non-support for same-sex unions.
Quote:
Opposition to gay marriage brings rare moment of unity in VP debate
By Tony Grew • October 3, 2008 - 19:53
The Republican and Democratic candidates for Vice President of the United States have spoken of their opposition to same-sex marriage.
Sarah Palin and Joe Biden made their views known during a televised debate last night.
Ms Palin, the Governor of Alaska, did better than expected.
Since she was nominated at the Republican party convention last month she has been criticised as inexperienced after a string of disappointing TV appearances.
During the debate Mr Biden, who is Barack Obama's running mate, tied Republican Presidential candidate John McCain's policies on Iraq, Afghanistan and the current economic turbulence to George Bush's record.
Ms Palin tried to portray herself as a straight-talking Washington outsider. Mr Biden has been a US Senator for more than 30 years.
The candidates struck a rare note of unanimity over gay marriage. At present gay and lesbian people can get married in Massachusetts and California.
"In an Obama-Biden administration, there will be absolutely no distinction from a constitutional standpoint or a legal standpoint between a same-sex and a heterosexual couple," said Senator Biden.
"Neither Barack Obama nor I support redefining from a civil side what constitutes marriage."
Ms Palin said she also opposed same-sex marriage.
"No one would ever propose, not in a McCain-Palin administration, to do anything to prohibit, say, visitations in a hospital or contracts being signed," she added.
At 44, Ms Palin is three years younger than Barack Obama and 28 years younger than Senator McCain.
She was elected Governor of Alaska less than two years ago. Her husband Todd is a Yup'ik Alaskan native.
The eldest of her five children, 18-year-old Track, began his military service in Iraq last month.
Her image as a hunting, shooting, snowmobile-riding outdoors woman helped boost her popularity in Alaska.
While she claims to have gay friends and is receptive to arguments about discrimination, she said she would support a statewide ballot question in Alaska that would deny benefits to homosexual couples.
"I believe that honouring the family structure is that important," she told the Anchorage Daily News in 2006.
However, she later reluctantly agreed to follow the state Supreme Court ruling that same sex partners should receive equal benefits to heterosexual couples.
Asked about her views on homosexuality during a TV interview earlier this week, Ms Palin stated that homosexuality is a "choice."
"I am not going to judge Americans and the decisions that they make in their adult personal relationships," she claimed.
Ms Palin said one of her "absolute best friends" is a lesbian.
"She is not my gay friend, she is one of my best friends who happens to have made a choice that isn't a choice that I have made, but I'm not going to judge people," she said.
|
The problem here, is that in America's (essentially) two-party system, there has been an undeniable and non-negotiable "non-support" for same-sex marriage. What this means is that those in power refuse to define "marriage" as anything other than the union between a man and a woman—that is, for the purpose of building a family. This assumes that the only legitimate family structure is that headed by a man and a woman. This rules out the idea that a family can consist of two partners of the same sex vis-à-vis a homosexual relationship.
This is a distressing situation. It assumes that gays and lesbians are not entitled to the same mode of family-building as the rest of society. It indirectly denies that homosexual relationships are valid.
Without turning this into a debate on the constitutional legitimacy of either claim—or a debate on whether homosexual relationships can be compared to relationships with animals, multiple partners, or children—I think it's essential to discuss why in America, an ostensibly democratic and liberal nation, there is unequivocal "non-support" by both parties for homosexual relationships within the context of families.
In Canada, same-sex marriage is a possibility. You need to find a clergyman or -woman who will do the service, but it is completely legal and recognized. Canada isn't the only nation who does this, but it is a good case where a society has finally recognized gays and lesbians as people who are entitled to the same social structure of marriage and family. It is the legitimizing homosexual relationships as valid social bonds that are perfectly capable of building families. After all, gays and lesbians are people too, right?
Will America ever permit same-sex marriage? What are the real barriers? Is America generally liberal or conservative? What are American gays and lesbians to do in light of this?
Marriage isn't essential for building families, but there are several reasons why heterosexuals do it, so why not homosexuals? I hope that same-sex couples go ahead with their families anyway. More power to them. But they should continue to fight for equal rights to marriage.
However, I think things look pretty grim in light of everything.
What do you guys think?