|
- CHRISTOPHER LATIME
Friday, May 09, 2008
JOHN
MCCAIN
IS
certainly
not
perfect
on
gay
issues.
Even
though
the
senator
has
been
ordained
a
“maverick,”
which
occasionally
places
him
at
odds
with
the
religious
right,
gay
voters
should
maintain
a
healthy
skepticism
concerning
the
Arizona
senator.
McCain’s
reputation
as
a
maverick
is
well
deserved
when
considering
the
response
by
conservatives
to
his
status
as
the
Republican
presidential
nominee.
Ann
Coulter
lambasted
McCain
as
a
traitor
to
conservatives,
so
much
so
that
she
would
campaign
for
Hillary
Clinton
if
he
were
nominated.
Rush
Limbaugh
has
also
weighed
in
on
McCain
by
declaring
that
his
nomination
would
destroy
the
Republican
Party.
And
James
Dobson,
a
prominent
evangelical
Christian
leader,
said
he
could
not
“in
good
conscience”
vote
for
McCain.
Collectively,
these
comments
may
provide
a
basis
for
the
gay
community
to
take
a
second
look
at
a
possible
McCain
presidency.
McCain
has
also
taken
what
has
been
characterized
by
some
gays
as
a
“courageous
stand”
on
a
very
important
gay-related
issue:
same-sex
marriage.
McCain
opposed
a
constitutional
amendment
that
would
ban
same-sex
marriage.
As
a
result,
evangelical
Christians
within
the
Republican
Party
have
used
this
to
attack
McCain’s
conservative
credentials.
McCain’s
opposition,
however,
was
not
based
on
any
sense
of
fundamental
fairness,
equality
or
individual
rights,
but
primarily
on
his
long
support
for
state’s
rights
—
a
classic
conservative
stance.
Such
a
position
fails
to
provide
any
assurances
or
foundation
for
protecting
LGBT
rights.
ACKNOWLEDGING
THAT
MCCAIN
supported
the
Arizona
constitutional
ban
on
same-sex
marriage,
James
Kirchick
in
a
guest
column
from
April
in
the
Advocate
characterized
his
position
as
“regrettable,”
but
“less
relevant”
for
a
senator
or
president
who
operates
on
a
national
level.
This
point
is
debatable,
however,
because
it
fails
to
recognize
one
of
the
lesser-discussed
constitutional
powers
provided
to
the
president
under
our
Constitution.
The
presidential
power
of
appointment
under
Article
II
would
have
greater
ramifications
for
the
LGBT
community
on
both
the
state
and
federal
level.
Even
if
McCain
is
not
actively
hostile
toward
the
LGBT
community,
his
cabinet
and
judicial
appointments
could
have
a
far
greater
impact
than
opposition
to
a
ban
on
same-sex
marriage.
McCain’s
selection
of
attorney
general
would
be
significant.
The
attorney
general
is
the
final
arbiter
when
it
comes
to
pursuing
legal
discrimination
claims.
Given
McCain’s
opposition
to
adding
sexual
orientation
to
the
federal
hate
crimes
bill
or
the
Employment
Non-Discrimination
Act
this
could
have
far
reaching
effects.
THE
MOST
IMPORTANT
difference
between
an
Obama
or
Clinton
presidency
versus
a
McCain
presidency
concerns
the
Supreme
Court.
McCain
has
expressed
his
disdain
for
activist
judges
and
has
praised
President
Bush
for
nominating
individuals
who
strictly
interpret
the
Constitution.
This
is
code
for
conservative.
McCain
has
also
taken
the
mandatory
pledge
to
nominate
justices
that
resemble
Chief
Justice
John
Roberts
and
Associate
Justices
Samuel
Alito,
Antonin
Scalia
and
Clarence
Thomas.
Roberts
and
Alito
have
yet
to
rule
on
a
case
concerning
sexual
orientation
but
it
is
well
known
that
Scalia
and
Thomas
have
been
hostile
toward
gay
rights.
Both
dissented
in
the
landmark
case
of
Lawrence
v.
Texas
(2003),
which
struck
down
same-sex
sodomy
laws.
A
McCain
nominee
has
the
potential
to
be
on
the
court
for
30-40
years.
As
a
gay
Republican,
I
often
get
asked
why
I
belong
to
a
party
that
is
openly
hostile
toward
gays.
My
response
is
that
change
is
more
likely
to
occur
from
within.
A
McCain
presidency
would
represent
a
shift
from
an
administration
that
used
gay
rights
as
a
campaign
tactic
to
scare
moderates
and
galvanize
the
Christian
right.
But
I
am
not
so
sure
that
a
more
neutral
tone
would
represent
a
net
benefit
for
us.
This
doesn’t
mean
that
as
a
community
we
should
blindly
support
the
Democratic
nominee
for
president,
but
let’s
not
be
naïve
in
our
evaluation
of
McCain
and
what
his
presidency
could
do
or
fail
to
do
for
gay
rights
in
America.
|
 |
