Elizabeth Edwards Affirms Support for Gay Marriage

In San Francisco today at the Gay Pride event, Elizabeth Edwards endorsed gay marriage:

"I don't know why someone else's marriage has anything to do with me," Mrs. Edwards said at a news conference before the parade started. "I'm completely comfortable with gay marriage."

John Edwards supports civil unions but not gay marriage. Why? According to Elizabeth,

He has a deeply held belief against any form of discrimination, but that's up against his being raised in the 1950s in a rural southern town."

I don't like that excuse. He seems to have broken the chains of the rest of his southern taboos, why not this one?

< And Now For Something Completely Different . . . | The Evil Men of The Bush Administration >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Second-class unions (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by fafnir on Mon Jun 25, 2007 at 09:54:07 AM EST
    I'm surprised that Edwards -- a former public protection attorney -- has placed himself in the untenable position of advocating "separate but equal" for couples who simply desire the same protections, freedoms and benefits of marriage enjoyed by everyone else.

    Elizabeth Edwards Affirms support for Gay Marriage (4.00 / 1) (#5)
    by sab on Mon Jun 25, 2007 at 01:12:47 PM EST
    I don't have a problem with John Edwards position. My husband and I were married by a judge, which really means it's a civil union in the eyes of our respective churches. His church wouldn't marry us without an annulment (awkward to explain to his children) and my church wouldn't marry us without extensive (and expensive) pre-marital counselling. We have all the legal protections of marriage. This seems like a reasonable thing for any gay couples to expect. If they then want to shop around for a church that's amenable, that's fine with me. But at least let them have the legal protections that my husband and I enjoy (without the approval of our respective churches) as straight married adults.

    Not electorally expedient (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Sun Jun 24, 2007 at 09:16:57 PM EST
    Or, if we are to believe Bob Shrum (r.i.s.k.y.) he has some issues with gays generally.

    Translation of her comment: (none / 0) (#2)
    by Geekesque on Sun Jun 24, 2007 at 10:39:24 PM EST
    "John is running for president, and I'm not."

    Seriously, I know gay men who from Alabama who are Edwards's age.  Somehow they've overcome the Antigaymarriageitis that Ms. Edwards suggests plagues Southern men.

    Give John a break (none / 0) (#3)
    by BigMitch on Mon Jun 25, 2007 at 01:50:57 AM EST
    He is a religious man, and it goes against his religion. Give him credit for not wanting to impose his religious views on gays.

    Please visit the Schapira blog, "What we know so far ..."

    ... and tell 'em Big Mitch sent ya!