By now, we all know where the major party candidates running for President stand on the topic of same-sex marriage equality. What you may not know, however, is the backstory that got us here.
I’ve already shared several articles and blogs about how support of same-sex marriage made it into the Democratic Platform (here and here). The following provides a little bit of background on the Republican Platform.
In late August, the Republican platform committee voted on a proposed plank that would have added the recognition of civil unions for unmarried couples – both gay and straight – to the party platform. The plank, proposed by Rhode Island representative Barbara Ann Fenton, did not pass.
Even though the proposed plank was defeated, there was still an attempt to clarify the language around “traditional marriage.” According to Politico:
…Nevada representative Pat Kerby tried to amend the traditional marriage section to say that every American should be treated “equally under the law” as long as they are not hurting anyone else. He said that the GOP should focus on an economic message, not waging the culture wars.
However, Kansas Secretary of State, Kris Kobach disagreed. In fact, he contended that the government still “condem[s]” activities like drugs and polygamy even though they aren’t hurting anyone else. (Sad to see love between two people compared to drugs and polygamy.)
But it wasn’t just Kobach that spoke out. There were many others willing to speak out against civil unions. The final result:
The GOP will maintain its official support for a constitutional amendment that would “protect traditional marriage” by defining it as between a man and a woman.
Yes, you read that right: The GOP maintains it’s support for a constitutional change to “protect traditional marriage.”
Of course, this is just one issue within the Platform, however, it’s a pretty big one for most reading this blog. Educate yourself on the Platforms from both sides and then cast your vote this November.
I’m standing with the guy that opposes amending the Minnesota state constitution to limit the rights of committed same-sex couples.
Note: You can learn more about the discussion and see more quotes from the platform committee via Politico.