Republican Presidential Candidate Senator John McCain, 71, was on the Ellen DeGeneres show this morning, and he told her in a somewhat roundabout way that he doesn’t support full marriage rights for same sex couples. Ellen announced last week after the landmark decision by the California Supreme Court legalizing same sex marriage that she would marry her longterm partner, Portia de Rossi.
McCain was respectful in his response and measured, but he pretty much said he’ll never support full rights for same sex couples:
McCain: “I think that people should be able to enter into legal agreements, and I think that is something that we should encourage, particularly in the case of insurance and other areas. Decisions that have to be made. I just believe in the unique status of marriage between a man and woman and I think that we have a respectful disagreement on that issue.”
Ellen: “Yeah, it is looked at and some people are saying the same – that blacks and women did not have the right to vote. Women just got the right to vote 1920, blacks didn’t have the right to vote until 1870, and it just feels like there’s this old way of thinking that we are not all the same. We are all the same people, all of us. You’re no different than I am. Our love is the same.
“To me, what it feels like… I will speak for myself. It feels when someone says you can have a contract and you’ll get insurance and you’ll get all that. It sounds to me like saying “Well you can sit there, you just can’t sit there.” That’s what it sounds like to me. It doesn’t feel inclusive. It feels isolated… like we are not owed the same things. In wording.”
McCain: “Well, I’ve heard you articulate that position in a very eloquent fashion. We just have a disagreement and I, along with many many others, wish you every happiness.”
Ellen: “So you’ll walk me down the aisle? Is that what you’re saying?”
McCain: “Touché.”
[Transcribed from video shown above.]
I’ve said this before, but I don’t dislike McCain as a person. I don’t agree with his politics at all, but I admire the way the man has handled himself for years. He comes across like he has integrity, and as Obama often mentions, McCain is a genuine war hero.
Ellen really brought the point home when she said McCain’s position was an “old way of thinking.” The guy is 71, and he comes across like this doddering old grandfather set in his ways. He was on The Regis & Kelly show a couple weeks ago and he told this long rambling story which seemed to have no point, and it just struck me like he’s not with it at all. I wish him well, but America doesn’t need another Republican in office for four more years, they need change and someone who will support the rights of everyone regardless of who they are and who they love.
I’m not worried about who will become president because it doesn’t matter. I know I sound like a broken record but I’m hoping some people will take notice.
Congress and Senate will screw up the best laid plans of any president time and time again.
Vote all their happy behinds out and support term limits. If you think McCain is doddering, you should try looking at some of this old filibusting, ingratiating windbags taking up precious time and energy on the senate and house floors.
So we need someone in office that will support “everyone” regardless of who they are – Excuse me, but I don’t think I need to subject my 6 year old in 1st grade that a classmate has decided he doesn’t want to be a boy anymore so now the school has to make accomodations for this, give me a frickin break. What about someone supporting my rights regardless of who I am.
Emily, if you cannot rationally impart to your child that all people are equal and deserve to be treated as human beings regardless of their personal choices, then you have no right to be a parent.
HO, SIT DOWN!
I don’t mind McCain as a person either, but I agree with CB that we don’t need another 4 years of a Republican in the White House.
And headache is right about the legislature 🙄
Emily – allowing people to be who they want to be without discriminating against them is part of what the US is supposedly all about. We all have the right to disagree with someone if they live a different lifestyle from our own, but we do not have the right to prevent that person from living that lifestyle. And I seriously doubt your child is in danger of having to go to school with a gay five-year old. Most kids just want to have fun and be accepted at that age. They’re not worried about their barely-developed sexuality.
And I have many reasons for not supporting John McCain – this being only one of them. I dont’ care how nice he is, or how much of a hero he is, I don’t want a president I can’t find a way to relate to on any level.
Kolby to Emily : Touché!!!!
whether you like it or not, he has a right to his opinion just as ellen does. it is virtually impossible to elect a president who will support every single value that an individual believes in. as americans, it is our duty to stand behind our president no matter what, to show the rest of the world that we are united and strong and not open to attack.
‘What about someone supporting my rights regardless of who I am.’
Emily, who are you that you’re being denied your rights?
And Lulu, it is not our duty to stand behind our president no matter what. Part of being in a democracy is having the right to question the actions of the government and I fully support that.
Not supporting full marriage rights for gay couples as a personal opinion is ok. When someone is potentially in a position to influence that same legislation, then it becomes a very different issue.
He IS entitled to his opinion but it’s a shame it’s not one that acknowledges the diverse world in which he and the rest of us now live, and that, in my opinion, makes him unsuitable for office in 2008 when issues like these should not even be issues.
Well I don’t support homosexual marriage but I still will NOT VOTE FOR McCAIN!!!
SAY NO TO MCCAIN!!
____
Shakira Mebarak owes me money.
If our country legalizes gay marriage, then we need to also legalize polygamy and incestuous marriages. After all, in all three cases, you are using the law to impose your morality onto someone else. Why should gays get the freedoms that mormons and brother-sister relationships are denied?
Extreme, yes, but the same argument none the less.
(Just a note, I mean of age marriages. If you are too young to enter into a legally binding contract, you are too young to marry.)
I think McCain is probably a really great, nice guy, I’m sure I would love for him to be my grandpa!
The biggest problem I have with this whole argument is that people who are against it, who don’t support gay marriage, scream and yell about other people’s beliefs/lifestyles/choices being forced on them, when in fact, they are forcing their beliefs in what marriage is supposed to mean on other people just as clearly.
If “marriage” was nothing more than a religious meaning, meant only for a man and a woman as outlined by God, then government and legal shouldn’t be involved. You shouldn’t be able to have it both ways.
I have the right to marry a woman.
Then this homosexual dude comes and asks for EQUAL rights.
Guess what homo dude? YOU TOO have the same EQUAL right to marry a woman.
end of story? not quite.
(What homosexuals want is a special right, something it does not exist, something that HAS TO BE CREATED for them, a SPECIAL treatment)
They say they are not asking to be treated special, WELL THEY ARE!!!
If some guy comes and says he wants to marry his 20 yr old daughter, well guess what a SPECIAL law will have to be created to allow him to do that.
Homosexuals have twisted the definition of EQUAL RIGHTS to accommodate their agenda.
Simple as that.
Love ellen but she is 100% wrong.
I don’t know, headache, using those two examples, your argument would imply that being gay is a choice, which I (and I’d hazard, a fair number of the population) would accept is not the case. I just don’t think the same grounds exist at all for the legalisation and recognition in law of either polygamous or incestuous relationships.
The term ‘marriage’ seems to be what people get up in arms about. Maybe it shouldn’t be described as marriage and just be left as civil partnership, civil union, whatever, but I can’t get too het up about it either way.
How about a sane argument against gay marriage?
Marriage is (and ALWAYS has been) defined as a union between a man and a woman. Once you change that definition, you undermine and diminish marriage.
Ok, so now you want it to be a union of man/man or woman/woman. What if 3 people love each other? What about 4 people wanting to get married? Why should they be discriminated against?Who said it should only be between 2 people?
And who says it should be only people? I love my pet, and it’s obvious she loves me. Why can’t we get married?
Why can’t some hillbilly marry his sister? They’re in love. And who says it has to be forever? Why can’t I get married for only a month? That’s discrimination.
Once you alter something so that it becomes all-inclusive, you end up with nothing.
Every gay person in the US has always had the right to get married in the US. It just had to be to a member of the opposite sex.
ho hum, this will never be solved… maybe you people should be thankful for what you DO have intead of fussing over things like gay marriages. the United States is never going to be utopia, as no place on this earth ever will be. my advice is to find something you believe in and keep your faith about it. in time, things will look better..
Y’all, let’s be real. What on earth kind of place does the government have in someone’s marriage, anyway? It doesn’t have too much of a role in anyone’s marriage, aside from social security benefits.
Gov’t just needs to butt out. And for all you liberal wackos, you invite the government into your lives more and more everyday. Way to go.
Headache:
People of the LDS faith (mainstream mormons) have not practiced polygamy for well over 100 years. People who choose this way of life are in no way affiliated with the LDS religion, regardless of what they say.
I’m not attacking, just informing.
We need change, but headache is right, our government is long screwed by the idiots who are supposed to be the form of checks and balances. What good does a strong head do if the body is paralyzed?
It’s a difficult position really. So far, they have no scientific evidence that being gay is something that just is. I mean you can dig up a dead guy from a hundred years ago, test his DNA and find out that he was a male, white, carried certain risks for cancer, etc. But so far, not that he was gay. Now, I don’t know if that’s because science hasn’t caught up to that or because there is no hard genetic and/or anatomic component to being gay.
What I do know is that feeling incredibly strongly about something does not make it not a choice.
Now it’s not a choice in the sense of hmm I’m choosing to eat Burger King today but I do think it’s a choice in the sense of Burger King is better than McDonalds. Now where does the choice to think pink is a better color than blue?
Should you be discriminated against because you like pink better than blue?
Should we make special allowances to remove pink to avoid the wrath or the blue lovers or vice versa?
Do we shun people who say they like blue better than pink?
Yeah, I know, that’s a very simplistic way of looking at it. But again, there you go.
Morality is exclusive of choice. Now I know someone is going to scream bloody murder with my next metaphor but just to be clear, I am not saying being gay is equal to my next examples, I’m just using it to illustrate a point.
Stealing is no less illegal for a kleptomaniac, adultery is no less abhorent for a sex addict and alcoholism is not an excuse for drunken driving.
I don’t know if gay marriage should be legal. But I know that I don’t think being gay means that gay marriage should be legal.
I am very liberal and believe that everyone should live a life that fits them. Why make an issue of legalizing marriage. No one is preventing homosexuals from living together or creating a life together. It’s after all just a piece of paper right? Let it go and live you life instead of spending all this precious time trying to convince others that your union is valid. It’s between the happy gay couple.
Jody, I don’t think I implied that all mormons are polygamists. And if you took what I said to mean that, I’m sorry.
What I was implying is that most polygamists are Mormon.
But at the time the Mormon church was formed and up until Utah sought statehood, the vast majority of Mormons were polygamist. It could be considered discriminatory that the church was forced to abandon one of their religious principles to be granted statehood and citizenship.
I’m about to shut the comments down on this thread. Any objections?
no CB, ya´re totally right on this one!
tchuss
it’s tacky to see presidential hopefuls on daytime tv- i know they are doing it for votes and popularity but yuck. let’s keep government away from the entertainment sphere.
whatever happened to little kids aspiring to be president?
now they want to grow up to be models and american idols- how sad.
watch as some of this country’s youth gets dumber and dumber.
The government will never do anything about gay marriage on a national level. No amendment no national law. Local govt might on a state by state basis.
The Fed will only trot this issue out every election year because they know it will make people scream and shout…. and if your shouting about gay marraige you aren’t talking about what a crappy job the govt has been doing. You aren’t talking about issues they don’t want to have to answer for.
Public: Mr Pres, why do you spy on your own people? Why do you illegally pressure the telecoms to help and why now do you want to grant them immunity?
W: Gay Marriage..
Public: GAY MARRIAGE?!?! SHOUT SHOUT BABBLE BABBLE FIRE BRIMSTONE!!
W: (snicker/smirk) Works every time..
For the record I very strongly against discrimination and prejudice. So I am all for gay marriage. I have no problem with polygamy either as long as all involved parties are willing. (Though I couldn’t manage to live with one person very long I can’t imagine trying it with more than that.) Further more I am very much in favor of marriage contracts that expire and must be renewed if you want to stay married.
Michael D: Incest is outlawed for health reasons if you are closer than 2nd cousins, NOT because it offends some holy book. As for pets while I am sure you love yours, the pet can’t enter into a legal contract so no pet marriage for you.
You can if you like. But I don’t see how this has gotten any nastier than some of the other boards. In fact, I see, with one exception, some logical debate.
Of course! Talking about legalizing incest is very civilized!!!! (even worse,comparing it to gay marriage)that was just sick!
Most of countries in europe have legalized same sex marriage and guess what? They didn´t colapsed! nor increased the number of “gay children” in their schools!
“It’s a difficult position really. So far, they have no scientific evidence that being gay is something that just is..”
But you could apply the exact same argument to lack of scientific evidence for heterosexuality! I disagree very strongly with you on this. I think the urge is exactly the same – no different – as the heterosexual one which drives me and, on that basis, there’s no logical or moral argument for same-sex relationships not being given the same credence and respect and recognition in law, with everything that goes with it, that the rest of us take for granted.
I am a gay male, probably one of the few who come to this site. I am often quite disturbed at the views of the posters here. I don’t care about how any of you lead your lives because let’s face it, it doesn’t affect me. Don’t flatter yourselves, I don’t want to know you or your children and I certainly don’t want to influence them, that’s your job as a parent. All I want is to be able to take care of myself and those I love.
Gays will not undermine marriage any more than heterosexuals like Britney Spears, Jennifer Lopez or any of the other people who have been making a mockery of it for years. It may only be a piece of paper, but if it allows me to see my partner when he’s dying and allows me the tax breaks of heterosexuals then I’m all for it. Everyone keeps saying it’s about Christian values and such but if it is, then why is the government involved? As long as marriage effect tax laws, estate laws, etc. then I’m all for gay marriage (or whatever you’d like to call it to make you all happy).
PLEASE DISLIKE MCCAIN AS A PERSON__HE IS A SGITTY ONE!!!
Google NEOCONSERVATIVE and tell me McCain truly follows what the Republican party traditionally believes in…
He does not give a shit about gay marriage,. it is just something he uses to get people to vote for him, and that is sad. They all do it, Dems and Reps, so I hate them all. It is all about swaying the masses for personal gain–THINK ROME!
Larissa, don’t lump me in with the fool who made that argument. I never once said it shouldn’t be legal because it will scar my children or some such nonsense. I don’t think that legalizing it or not will have any effect of on the growth or decline of the gay community. (although can we stop with this whole “community” thing? I mean seriously. We are a community as a whole, not based on gender, race or sexual orientation)
But I do think that both incest (as in an adult relationship between siblings or cousins, not a father/child one) and being gay while not the same animal are the same in that they violate the dictates of someone’s moral code. As does polygamy.
The argument is that people can’t help who they fall in love with right? So if that’s the case, you should be able to marry anyone who is old enough to enter into a legally binding contract, which is after all, what marriage, at least in the context of legality, is.
Headache you’re the reason this thread is getting shut down, and it’s not about having a different opinion, it’s about trying to repeat it 50 different slippery slope ways and not shutting up.