The Commonwealth of Virginia's Ultimate Blog

Tuesday, February 01, 2005

Tim Kaine and Gay Marriage

We'll take these in chronological order, so you can see Tim Kaine's strong consistent stance on this issue. I put this together because of Kaine's recent comments to the Virginia Family Foundation.

1) During a debate for the Lt. Governor's nomination on May 24, 2001, Tim Kaine said he supported "civil benefits" for same sex couples. The RT-D coverage from May 25th noted, "The candidates differed on little during last night's debate, agreeing on issues ranging from abortion rights to support of gay civil unions and the need for gun control."

2) When Tim Kaine was challenged on this issue by Republican Lt. Governor candidate Jay Katzen, he granted an interview to Richmond Style Magazine. The July 31, 2001 article states:

"I think the institution of marriage is fine. I don’t believe we need to create an alternative," Kaine tells Style. "Gays and lesbians should not be discriminated against in housing, or employment. When the question came up in the debate I said I support changing the state discrimination laws to [include gays]."
3) Kaine hedged again in the September 7, 2001 issue of the Washington Blade:

Only Kaine, a civil rights lawyer, has spoken in favor of granting certain rights to gay couples in long-term relationships. He said he supports the right of gay people in long-term relationships to enjoy the "civil benefits" available to married couples.

"I have never said I supported gay civil unions, gay marriages," Kaine told the AP last Friday. "I do believe that people shouldn’t be kicked out of their jobs or discriminated against because of who they are."
4) On November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts released its decision in Goodridge v. Massachusetts. Tim Kaine released a statement on the same day.

"Marriage between a man and a woman is the building block of the family and a keystone of our civil society. It has been so for centuries in societies around the world. I cannot agree with a court decision suddenly declaring that marriage must now be redefined to include unions between people of the same gender.

"Virginia defines marriage as being between a man and a woman and I strongly support that law. Regardless of the court ruling today in another state, I am confident that there is nothing in the Virginia or federal constitutions that would require Virginia to alter its longstanding policy about marriage."

That is, Tim Kaine doesn't think that either the Federal or the Virginia Constitution needs a constitutional amendment.

5) Tim Kaine reiterated his "stance" at AP day in December 8, 2004. In the Daily Progress's coverage of the story, we hear that:

The Democrat also insisted that he opposes gay marriage and gay civil unions but supports contractual rights for gay and lesbian Virginians.

Kilgore said he favors a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, which Kaine opposes.

6) Then, in an appearance before the Virginia Family Foundation Board on January 31st, we learn that:

Kilgore and Kaine said they support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriages. Both said they disapprove of adoptions by gay couples.

But Kaine said that when he was a missionary in Honduras, he witnessed orphans who were treated "hellaciously." As a consequence, he would favor allowing individual gays or lesbians to adopt, so long as they create a loving environment, he said.
There you have it. Less than 15 months after saying he didn't believe that either Virginia or Federal law needed to modified in light of Goodridge, and less than two months after opposing a constitutional amendment, we learn that Tim Kaine now recognizes a need for such an amendment.

I have added this post. I made the update separate because I didn't want it to get lost. Kaine's position does not include a constitutional ban on civil unions.


Blogger Scott said...

Huh? Where in there did Kaine say he recognized a need for a constitutional amendment? In your ill-advised attempt to create a muddled picture of Kaine's position, I see nothing but consistency. You have failed to point to anything inconsistent, or worthy of criticism, in Kaine's record. Try again.

1:26 PM

Blogger Addison said...

It's 13 lines above your name.

"Kilgore and Kaine said they support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriages."

1:47 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

You're right to attack Kaine on this! But I would rather see you go after him for being soft on gay marriage than for being wishy-washy.

I was really disappointed to see in the article you're citing that Kilgore wouldn't answer the question about gay adoptions. How hard is that to answer? Kaine sounds like he's for gay adoption, like any Democrat pretty much. But Kilgore? I'd like to see a clarification from him on what he really thinks about gay adoptions. Otherwise I have to assume he's for gay adoptions, otherwise why would he not answer the question?

Also, you don't talk about the abortion questions, which are also a problem. I knew Kaine was trying to have it both ways on this issue, but Kilgore is for the health exclusion? I didn't know that. It sounds to me like he's trying to have it both ways, too.

5:15 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gay marriage should be great for Jerry Kilgore. Have you ever heard that guy SPEAK? Can we say "James McGreevey?"

8:33 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Both President Bush and Vice President Cheney have come out (so to speak) in favor of civil unions. You do support the president, don't you?

1:28 PM

Blogger anastacia said...

thanks for the information on this blog! I find it very interesting and entertaining! hopefully soon have updates that I love your post! I thank you too!
buy viagra
viagra online
generic viagra

11:52 AM


Post a Comment

<< Home