Palin supports federal gay marriage ban (VIDEO)
-
-
- pigmonkey
- added this
"In my own state, I have voted, along with the vast majority of Alaskans who had the opportunity to vote, to amend our constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman. I wish on a federal level that's where we would go, because I don't support gay marriage. You know, I'm not going to be up there judging individuals, sitting in a seat of judgment, telling them what they can and can't do, or should and should not do, but I certainly can express my own opinion here and take actions that I believe would be best for traditional marriage, and that's casting my votes and speaking up for traditional marriage. That instrument, it's the foundation of our society ...that strong family, and that's based on that traditional definition of marriage."
Palin stopped short of supporting a federal gay marriage ban during her debate with opponent Sen. Joseph Biden on October 2. Touting a diverse group of friends and family, the Governor said that while she respected people's right to enter into legal contracts with one another and make their own decisions, "I'm being as straight up with Americans as I can in my non-support for anything but a traditional definition of marriage."
Alaska voters, 68%-32%, amended the state's constitution to ban same-sex marriages in 1998 with Ballot Measure 2. As of January 2007, the state does offer employment benefits to the partners of state employees per a state Supreme Court ruling which Palin ultimately grudgingly accepted on constitutional grounds.
Palin and running mate Sen. John McCain have previously said that they were supporters of states' rights. "I think it should be a states' issue not a federal government-mandated--mandating yes or no on such an important issue," Palin told CBS' Katie Couric in her September interview on the topic of Roe v. Wade. "I'm, in that sense, a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas...and I believe that individual states can best handle what the people within the different constituencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in an issue like that."
"I'm a federalist," Senator McCain told George Stephanopoulos in November 2006. "Just as I believe that the issue of gay marriage should be decided by the states, so do I believe that we would be better off by having Roe v. Wade return to the states." McCain opposed the 2004 Federal Marriage Amendment.
The following video is from CBN.com, released on October 20, 2008
-
- groups:
- Community, News and Politics, Politics, Viral Videos, 2 more
-
- tags:
- News, News and Politics, Politics, Viral Videos, 7 more
-
-
poosta7
-
we just read the Washington State voter pamphlet and noticed that Palin shows she attended University of idaho along with six other colleges but did not graduate. I thought the Republicans touted her as having at least a bachelor degree in journalism....Is she a college drop out or what? If anybody knows please post.
- 3 years ago
-
poosta7
-
-
krush_productions
-
If the church can touch little boys, why can't gays get married?
- 3 years ago
-
krush_productions
-
-
esk
-
this is what kills me about certain people who calls themselves "christian". who are you to define what is right or wrong for me or anyone else. does anyone else see the mccain/palin ticket as a MAJOR step backwards for civil rights, including feminisim?! im so scared for our future
- 3 years ago
-
esk
-
-
maof4brats [removed]
-
i have just one more thing about this person i have a little joke....
whats the difference between hockey mom going for vice prez and a pitbull with lipstick?nothing thier both bitches......
- 3 years ago
-
maof4brats [removed]
-
-
animalia_libero [removed]
- This comment was removed as a violation of community guidelines.
-
animalia_libero [removed]
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
animalia_libero:
You alter it for this it sets a precedent to alter it for other things that are not nearly as kind as this alteration would be.
Alter/Amend...it's the same right about now.
- 3 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
ninepounds6
-
animalia_libero:
Jammer... are you sure you are a writer???? You make absolutely no sense at all, but damn, you certianly think you do, don't you?
WTF are you trying to say here??????
- 3 years ago
-
ninepounds6
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
animalia_libero:
That you can't change the constitution to suit your own needs.
is there a problem here?
Other than your inability to use question marks, I don't see one.
- 3 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
ninepounds6
-
animalia_libero:
Dingbat.. that is EXACTLY why the constitution is changed... to suit our own needs!
Lord, what you need, in your own language, is edjumactionism.
- 3 years ago
-
ninepounds6
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
animalia_libero:
That's also not what I'm stating.
You two jump to conclusions without asking questions to understand. Great use of brain power. Teach a class with that method. I'm sure you'll create a bunch of intelligent students who will be a benefit to society at large.
- 3 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
animalia_libero:
I do not believe in alienating people in any way. Once you start it's a pratfall.
Her idea of what marriage is is not wrong because it's her idea and it harms no one as her idea. So what she thinks that?
But it cannot reach beyond that.
I also don't agree with amending marriage in any fashion to include homosexuals n the definition. People can't use rainbows because if they do they are considered to be gay....they like stole the entire colored spectrum for their own use. They took a word that meant happy and forever altered its meaning. It's the battle of the words.
Marriage (the word) is not theirs and I would totally understand a bloodbath over that word to keep it for man and woman.
I think homosexuals create a new word or use another word to use for their unions. They've also taken partner to a whole new level.
Words are powerful.
They deserve to have the rights afforded all couples. They just don't deserve to the right to use the word marriage.
- 3 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
animalia_libero:
If someone said they were gay...what is the first thing that pops in your mind?
What's the first thing that pops in your mind when someone has rainbow bumper sticker?
What do you think when two guys are holding hands?
you can say that they've been ostracized and be right, but I can say they alter meanings of words for their own liking without a care in the world who it affects and also be right.
Then there's the idea that gender blurring is ok....totally evening everything out so that there's no distinction between a male and a female outside of a penis, vagina and breast.
There are standards in many things in this world....people abide by them because if you don't they'll result in unwanted illnesses. There should be standards elsewhere as well.
- 3 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
Past doesn't matter. Democrats said so.
Moving on.
- 3 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
HaloedGriot
-
Racism, segregation and unequal rights also had a "tradition" in America, Mrs. Palin.
- 3 years ago
-
HaloedGriot
-
-
ppicard
-
It's sad that people buy into the shit that is flung.This is the age where you should have information!!!!We must change!!!
- 3 years ago
-
ppicard
-
-
aquamammal
-
It's funny that it's not ok for the federal gov't to mandate health care for you, but it's ok for the federal gov't to mandate who you can marry.
McCain/Palin is a joke.
- 3 years ago
-
aquamammal
-
-
ninepounds6
-
F*** Palin. Her time is almost up. I hear those drunk rednecks in Wasilla really love her and miss her.
She strikes me as more man than woman anyway, and since the main focus of the the Republican party is deflection...
- 3 years ago
-
ninepounds6
-
-
Eat_Disco
-
And fundamentalist religion gets in the way of yet another civil rights issue (not to say that ignorance and plane stupidity didn't have a hand in it either though).
- 3 years ago
-
Eat_Disco
-
-
InformedTexan
-
This is just ridiculous. I thought our society was based off of the ideals and doctrines set forth in the Constitution, not the idealized nuclear family from the 1950s. Supporting an amendment due to ideological beliefs is fine, but to propose that such a ban be a part of the U.S. Constitution, right next to the freedom of speech, is just downright appalling.
- 3 years ago
-
InformedTexan
-
-
ArtisGilmoreHOF
-
I support a federal Sarah Palin ban...
- 3 years ago
-
ArtisGilmoreHOF
-
-
carligula
-
Fuck you Sarah Palin!
No on Prop 8!
- 3 years ago
-
carligula
-
-
metalcookiesxy70
-
No is no such thing as a "traditional" marriage, Sarah Palin, I ask you, why?
- 3 years ago
-
metalcookiesxy70
-
-
maof4brats [removed]
-
you know what i am not gay but its none of my damn business who gets married and loves each other not everybody believes in the bible i was raised catholic i am now agnostic just because of this crap.she wants the goverment in our uterus and now our personal lives.
- 3 years ago
-
maof4brats [removed]
-
-
circa1986
-
Palin isnt fit for any kind of leadership role
take your finance into your own hands
here - 3 years ago
-
circa1986
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
- more