Edwards Shoots Himself In the Foot

As you might imagine, I am in a bad mood about the landslide victory of the anti-gay amendment in Missouri. And concerned, of course, but probably not as concerned as the HRC folks who spearheaded the MO campaign. Or the poor people in Louisiana that are next on the sacrificial block of hate politics.

What I find more offensive is that John Edwards says he and John Kerry have "no objection" to the vote. "We're both opposed to gay marriage and believe that states should be allowed to decide this question."

Okay, so he's citing states' rights. I'm Southern; I understand the argument. Unfortunately, it sends a couple of strong messages to gays supporting the Kerry-Edwards ticket:

1) It's okay to remove HUMAN rights if enough people don't like you - they won't object;
2) They are only our friends and supporters when convenient;
3) They take your vote for granted.

Unfortunately, this is going to backfire on them. Considering the narrow margin between Kerry and Bush, they really aren't in a position to be encouraging any part of their constituency to stay home on November 2nd or to cast a protest vote for Nader. But voicing solidarity with the MO vote is going to do just that. Plus, the people most vehemently against gay marriage are not going to vote for Kerry-Edwards anyway, since they tend to be Bush supporters. Why else would the Republicans be pushing for state amendments across the country instead of shoring up Dubya's many deficiencies?

The gays in VA are moving out-of-state. This is what will happen in many other places if these amendments pass. Gays leaving will warm the hearts of many 'loving' Christians, but the long-term effects on the state Democratic parties will be devastating. The people the party is trying to appeal to aren't going to vote 'Republican-Lite' when they can have the real bigots.

Sarah G