The always shrill National Gay & Lesbian Task Force
responded to President Bush's triangulating comments on gay
marriage (see yesterday's posting) with this bit of off-the-wall
hyperbole:
Bush's Support of the Federal Marriage Amendment Deemed a Declaration of War on Gay America. Crossing this line in the sand will provoke civil disobedience across country, says National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.
If NGLTF's leadership wants to personify infantile leftism, that's their business, but when they misreport to their members on matters of fact, it's serious. Bush did say it might become necessary, in his view, to pass an amendment that would "honor" or codify marriage as between one man and one woman. For that, he should be criticized. But Bush did not support the current wording of the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) now before Congress. In fact, as I noted yesterday, he pointedly left the door open for state-recognized civil unions and domestic partnerships, which the FMA would also ban, thus angering the religious right.
Think about that -- a conservative GOP president who has no problem with states recognizing civil unions for gay couples. Then ask yourself if this amounts to declaring "war" on gays.
It's worth remembering that just a few months ago NGLTF's Matt Foreman stood with black ministers who are leaders of the anti-gay Alliance for Marriage, at the 40th anniversary civil rights rally in Washington, and in his remarks failed to even mention gay marriage -- as Dale Carpenter noted in his syndicated column.
The
Washington Post gets the story right:
President Bush said for the first time yesterday that he could support a constitutional amendment opposing gay marriage, but he drew criticism from some conservatives for leaving the door open to state recognition of civil unions. "
He appeared to leave open the possibility of supporting the right of states to confer some form of legal recognition on same-sex couples, such as civil unions, which are opposed by many Christian conservatives.
But for the Bush-haters at NGLTF, the facts don't matter as long
as you have a chance to incite the passions of your donors. Just
like over at the religious right groups that are their mirror
opposites.
Hinged.
"hitching the Constitution to a position that is fast losing popular support [banning gay marriage] seems to me to be an abuse of that document. It should be amended only when there's an overwhelming consensus on a strictly Constitutional matter -- not when the country is deeply split on a social and cultural issue. "
The gay issue does strange things to presidents. Clinton said all the right things -- and then enacted and supported some of the most anti-gay measures ever (DOMA, "Don't ask, Don't Tell"). Bush still cannot even say the words 'gay' or 'lesbian' but hasn't done anything that damaging to gay men and women; and, by his ambivalence, might help kill an anti-gay Constitutional amendment. Go figure.