Gays And Lesbians Omitted From Draft Of Dem Party Platform

The 2004 Democratic Party platform, page 42:

"We support full inclusion of gay and lesbian families in the life of our nation and seek equal responsibilities, benefits, and protections for these families. In our country, marriage has been defined at the state level for 200 years, and we believe it should continue to be defined there. We repudiate President Bush's divisive effort to politicize the Constitution by pursuing a 'Federal Marriage Amendment.' Our goal is to bring Americans together, not drive them apart."

The 2008 draft Democratic Party platform, page 50:

"We support the full inclusion of all families in the life of our nation, and support equal responsibility, benefits, and protections. We will enact a comprehensive bipartisan employment non-discrimination act. We oppose the Defense of Marriage Act and all attempts to use this issue to divide us."

Notice the editor's red pen? "Gay and lesbian families" has now been replace by "all families."

Read the whole story here.

Comments

[cBc]

"We support the full inclusion of all families in the life of our nation, and support equal responsibility, benefits, and protections. We will enact a comprehensive bipartisan employment non-discrimination act. We oppose the Defense of Marriage Act and all attempts to use this issue to divide us."

What part of ALL is hard for you to understand?

[wdw101]

Eric8869

"Beaten for being gay. No just beaten. There is a difference."

a hate crime......is a made up phrase........if a person is beaten to death while nothing is said.......the crime is murder.......
if a person is beaten to death while having nasty things said to him. is he anymore dead.........the crime is murder.......

if a person is beaten down while nothing is said.......the crime is battery is he any less hurt because those nasty words were not used.......

if a person is beaten down while having nasty things said to him. is he hurt more by those words........the crime is battery .......

Unless the judge can know without a doubt what was in the accused head when the crime occurred, the words should cause no more time added to his sentence.....

If indeed the time served for murder or battery is not long enough. then change the penalty.....don't add in some stupid law with no basis in fact or proof......

if a person murders or beats another it is never a love crime.........

[steamboat]

Using 'families' in a way to hide the controversy instead of 'Gay and Lesbian' is the sofisticated way of saying, "don't ask, don't tell".

[BigLib]

Gays meet wheels of bus.

[kevineight]

Christ, what a non-issue.

The party rejects the defense for marriage act. Full stop.

[wdw101]

another reason to vote mccain

[Eric8869]

Yes cause your judgement has been so good the last 8 years. Please. Republicans= total nightmare for the US

[EuroRant1]

Oh you're absolutely right ...
McCain meets with the Log Cabin Club (Gay Republicans = oxymoron) at 2 AM at a undisclosed location, no media, no recordings, no cell phones, no cameras, no proof ... Did it take place? Really? Got any proof?
The GOP Platform for gays, lesbians, bi and transgendered is non-existant for the last 5 electional GOP platforms.
McCain is yet to mention the GLBT community once, just once, in any major speech. I said "major speech".
You're out of your element "wdw101" ... and that is forgivable but any GLBT voting for McSame is out of their minds. You may call yourself "Americans" but out here in the real world ... we refer to you as "Masochists".

[madvetenskapsman]

You may want to update the headline and story, as ABC has updated theirs... it actually says that it's one of the most inclusive platforms for LGBT issues.

[Piatt]

Think Tapper's headline is the exact opposite of the truth. Gays and Lesbians have been "included." As a GWM, that's fine by me.

[sleeperd]

The horror...the horror!!!

[lvogt]

The party platforms are politics biggest waste of time. In fact, they are generally counter-productive. They are universally ignored by the elected administrations and primarily serve as a talking points for the opposition. Everyone knows the Democrats are strong on civil rights for all. We should just leave it at that and move forward after the election.

[AguynamedWayne]

Obama doesn't support equality for gay Americans. In fact he supports a "Seperate but Equal" policy of civil unions instead of full marraige equality. Gay couples in NJ are already discovering that companies that issue benefits (ie insurance, health, inheritance etc.) are not recognizing civil unions as marraiges and are therefor withholding benefits. Seperate But Equal IS NOT EQUAL and it never has been.

The fact that the Democratic Platform now wants to omit gays entirely speeks volumes about the type of "CHANGE" that is really coming for gay Americans.

[nonconformist2]

I don't like it either, BUT, because getting elected president in the country requires getting votes from millions of homophobes, I would rather the democrats tamp down on their platform and WIN rather allow the republican thugs to use this as yet another election year wedge issue and DEFEAT the democrats. Once the democrats are in power, then they can champion civil rights. For one thing, they can pass a federal anti-discrimation law forcing employers to provide equal protection to civil unions as they do for marriage.

Of course gays and lesbians should be able to marry and have the same rights as everyone else. But I'm a realist, and I understand that without any power, the democrats can't do anything. I'm hoping we have civil unions for a while and then transition it into marriage, since it is bascially the same thing.

[AguynamedWayne]

No, it's not "basically" the same thing. Equality is where all citizens both gay and straight have the same access to the benefits of citizenship. Civil Unions is a policy of "seperate but equal" and by it's very nature precludes equality. History has taught us that these types of discriminatory policies DON'T WORK.

You can wrap bigotry up in a pretty bow, but it's still bigotry.

[wdw101]

"since it is basically the same thing." i agree then why marriage.

[Dave01]

There were only TWO Democratic candidates (and Zero Republicans) who supported the title of "marriage" for same-sex couples. They were Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich, and those two NEVER had a shot at making it to being the party's nominee. Hell, Clinton didn't even call for the repeal of the full DOMA legislation, only the part that bars federal recognition. She still supported the other part which states that a state does not have to recognize the marriage of a same-sex couple who got married in another state.

[wdw101]

there are only two democrats running now.....one just has an "r" painted by his name

[AguynamedWayne]

So there were only two Democrats who were right on the issue.

[wdw101]

"She still supported the other part which states that a state does not have to recognize the marriage of a same-sex couple who got married in another state." companies do not have to support this perversion of law..........just offer company insurance for the states that you hand pick.......As long as all EMPs are treated equal, accusations of discrimination will not prevail. I offer company paid family insurance for anyone married in the 10 states around mine. All other EMPs can have company paid individual insurance.

[wdw101]

but now you cause companies to change their policies on insurance......i now only cover a family if they were married within the 10 states around my state.......there now everyone is treated equally

[Eric8869]

Boring - u post this on every gay story

[truthskr]

WaynesWhirled - the same could be said of all of the democratic candidates, including Clinton, other than Kucinich. Obama and Clinton are IDENTICAL on their gay rights stances and, in my mind, at least Obama doesn't have a history of supporting and passing such oppressive policies and legislation like DADT and DOMA like the Clintons. Trying to pin this on Obama alone is ridiculous, particularly when you do not hold your canddiate of preference to the same ideal.

Unless you supported Kucinich in the primary, you have no legs on which to stand in criticizing Obama over any of the other candidates you may have supported.

[wdw101]

i'm voting McCain the other democrat in the race........granted he does have an 'R' painted by his name still a democrat

[FogBelter]

When was the last time a political party actually honored their Platform after the Election? The Platform is a bumper sticker ... nothing more.

[realityczech4u]

Mr. Tapper may have it all wrong. The omission of g&l's may actually be a covert method of including the "t"'s. The GLBT lobbyists are actively, though very quietly, rolling out the "t's" and the plethora of "rights" that they are allegedly being denied and must be recognized. What alerted me to this possibility with the DNC was mention in the article of the "bi-partisan employment non-discrimination act". The general populace, after decades of conditioning, no longer has a major objection to inclusion of g & l's in employment. T's are another story altogether. If people are made aware of it, they will not stand for it. And it is just in this area where GLBT are concentrating their energies. Many major corporations have already succumbed to the pressure and adopted "gender identity" into their policies even in the absence of such a law. I highly doubt that the omission in the DNC platform was an attempt to shun gays and lesbians. The Dems are after every vote they can get. And I hope they get them. The last thing I want to see is yet more hullabaloo about "appointed Presidents", "stolen elections" "buggered voting machines" and all the other excuses they roll out when the election is neck-and-neck. Obama by a landslide.

[PumaAnn]

At least they are leaving it up to the states. In my state, marriage is allowed, and it's been nice to see so many long-term couples finally get to tie the knot.

[wndrwrthg]

Is it not better to be part of the herd and thrive in its protection, rather than be segragated and suffer the attacks by those who will do so, alone?

[Lemeritus]

Do you mean "Don't ask, don't tell"? Just blend in so no one will know?

[wndrwrthg]

No, nothing like that. I believe in all rights for all people, if I have the right or choice to do something, then that should be an option for all others. By maintaining a seperate identity and calling for legislation for your particular afffiliation tends to invite oppression. Laws should extend to all and not have set asides for any group. Only by becoming one homogeneous group can we hope to achieve equality.

[terragazelle60]

One of the ammendments in the platform is an end to DADT and ENDA. They did not want to make a special amendment for Gays and lesbians because it would be easier for the bigots to claim "special rights." This headline is deceptive again.

The platform stresses All Families. All People. So do gays wants singled out or placed in the rest of society? As someone that is of a minority religion I can ask for the same rights as majority religions have...because I am not singled out as an exception.

Under the heading- A More Perfect Union:
Democrats will fight to end discrimination based on race, sex, ethnicity, national origin, language, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, age and disability in every corner of our country, because that"s the America we believe in.

Sen. Obama has included Gays in every speech he has made, even in 2004. He believes in equality and does not back away from it.

I watched the final meetings that took place on C Span...over 1600 meeting in all 50 states took place, over 30,000 people were heard from.

[wdw101]

yes

[beboy]

Especially since "straight" families suffer just as much discrimination as gay families do.

[PoliticoJonze]

"All families" included gay and lesbian families for crying out loud. They are being further included rather than excluded here folks.

[VOTER]

Agree!