Editor’s note: This story is the first in a five-part series.
During the 2004 presidential election, the terms “moral,” “social,” “traditional” and “family” values were interchangeable and unavoidable.
Editor’s note: This story is the first in a five-part series.
During the 2004 presidential election, the terms “moral,” “social,” “traditional” and “family” values were interchangeable and unavoidable.
Riding high on support from religious conservatives, incumbent presidential candidate George W. Bush benefited from the political climate that gave him four more years in the White House.
What might have been overlooked during that election year was 11 states, including Michigan, outlawing gay marriage in their constitutions.
Four years later, family values aren’t part of the presidential dialogue, but gay rights are still written out of American legal and political discourse.
“I think gay-lesbian issues in general are off the radar this time around,” said Michael Craw, an assistant James Madison College professor and a gay politics expert.
Craw said gay people have found most success through the judicial process rather than the electorate, and with potentially three U.S. Supreme Court nominations attached to winning the presidency, it is an important election for gay rights.
Jason Gauruder, an East Asian languages and culture junior, said although the candidates haven’t discussed gay rights much, the fight for gay rights has to jump over hurdles just like any American civil rights movement.
“It’s frustrating, but I’m also optimistic because there’s positive steps going in the right direction,” Gauruder said. “It’s going to be in the forefront from now on.”
Craw, as well as other members of the gay community, said he understands the country’s pressing needs lie in the economy, the war in Iraq and the energy crisis. But when so much was taken from the gay community four years ago, gay people can’t help but want to get something out of this election.
“(Being gay is) too big a part of my life and too many injustices have been done when it comes to that part of my identity, no matter how small it is,” journalism senior Jordan Barnes said.
Barnes said he realizes gay rights can be a sort of political poison for presidential candidates.
He said it’s “disheartening” that Sens. Barack Obama, D-Ill., or John McCain, R-Ariz., probably wouldn’t voice support of gay marriage even if they agreed with it because they might lose voters.
“Would I like Barack Obama to come out and say ‘I support gay rights?’ Yeah, I think that would be incredible,” Barnes said. “But I understand why he doesn’t do that.”
Coming from a conservative background, Barnes said he believes in leaving decisions such as gay marriage to the states, and Proposal 8 in California and Proposal 2 in Florida have him worried about a 2004 repeat. Both proposals would outlaw gay marriage, and both appear they could pass, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Craw said neither candidate has a stellar history as a champion of gay rights.
“I’m not belittling civil rights in any way, but I do think there are more important issues on the table right now,” he said. “I’m also at a different point in my life. I’m thinking I won’t be ready to be married for another 10 to 15 years, so a lot could happen by that point.”
Support student media! Please consider donating to The State News and help fund the future of journalism.