"Kerry mentioned that Cheney's daughter was a lesbian in response to a question from moderator Bob Schieffer of CBS News asking the candidates if they believed 'homosexuality is a choice?'
After President Bush had answered that he 'did not know,' Kerry began by saying, ' . . . If you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was, she's being who she was born as.'"
Well, it did come out a little awkward, but homosexuality is a subject that John Kerry is not uncomfortable discussing, and I think he was trying to make the question personal to the listeners, not just an "issue." Since candidates families are admired and in a way, adopted, by their supporters in this voting ritual, Kerry's strong statement of empathy might have crystallized into a shared realization among the people of this country. That would have been a good thing, especially since it's largely the neo-conservatives who have adopted the Cheney's as part of their extended family.
I guess it didn't. Too many Americans consider "lesbian" a cuss word.
I wish all that sensitivity that's showing up as "disapproval" would translate into consideration for partners' rights being upheld in our Constitution and state laws.
2 comments:
Dear Maggie:
I generally admire the good sense that you show in your writings, regardless of whether I agree with the content of them or not. In this one instance, however, I fear that you may be missing the point. I believe that many people are objecting to Senator Kerry's reference in the most recent debate to the fact that Vice President Cheney's daughter is a lesbian, not because they object to the word "lesbian", but because they (and certainly I) feel that Ms. Cheney has the right to conduct her own business without having her sexual orientation brought up in public by Kerry, and more to the point, without having Senator Edwards' (or his staff) "out" her as a lesbian in the first place.
I personally feel that there has been altogether too much invasion of privacy either by the press or by both political parties, who feed such information to the press. I suspect that many people are getting tired of such invasion of privacy. Thus, the negative poll.
Dear Bernard.
I don't disagree. This whole election process is so warped that normal behavior and straight answers from a candidate are really dangerous territory.
I DO know that in different circles, the subject of homosexuality is handled very differently. Some people (like Kerry) have moved on from homosexuality being an issue, accepting the validity and potential of relationships. Many other people have not, and are adament that they WILL not move on.
I stand by my interpretetation of that particular incident in the debate, but I do agree that is normally a private subject for private conversation. And I think it is the public nature of the debate that makes it feel wrong. Nevertheless, the normally private question was broached, and the audience includes a large segment of people who are making this issue public in a very negative way, by supporting all the
attempts to introduce marriage amendments to the constitution.
Methinks those who protest, protest too much. Their prejudices are showing. ; )
Now they seem to want to have their cake and eat it too.
pax,
maggie
ps. I'll be so glad when this is over. It's like childbirth.
Post a Comment