The Five Things Bill Clinton Should Do to Take a Firm Stand on Gay Marriage
Published September 26, 2009 @ 09:56AM PT

Bill Clinton made a bit of history last night, when on Anderson Cooper 360, he finally admitted he was wrong to not support marriage equality while President of the United States. While not a full on retraction of his support for policies like the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the former President now admits that he was wrong to be hung up on the word marriage.
"Me, Bill Clinton personally, I changed my position. I am no longer opposed to that. I think if people want to make commitments that last a lifetime, they ought to be able to do it," Clinton told Cooper. He then cited his support for gay adoption and the fact that he grew up in a different time period and realized he needed to evolve as reasons for his change in position.
This is great news, albeit thirteen years too late to save DOMA from becoming law. Still, history is history, and this frankly is a bit of history. And the best part is that now there's time left for Clinton to take a stand for marriage equality and really help change this country. Here are five ways how he can do this:
1. Go to Maine and campaign for marriage equality. Maine, as well all know, is in the midst of a ballot initiative that could repeal the rights of gays and lesbians to marry. The No on 1 campaign needs all the support it can get to beat down this ballot initiative (vote no on 1!), and Clinton's voice could certainly help lend a hand. Poll numbers show that the race is neck-and-neck. Clinton's voice could make a huge difference.
2. Go to Washington and campaign for Referendum 71. Washington state is also in the thick of a battle to keep very good domestic partnership benefits in place. Anti-gay activists have put a ballot measure forward that could repeal these benefits for same-sex couples. Clinton's voice in Washington -- a state he carried twice with relative ease, and a blue state in almost every part of the word -- could be a huge boon for folks working for the Approve Referendum 71 campaign.
3. Lend his voice in support of the recently introduced Respect for Marriage Act. The bill, introduced in the U.S. House earlier this month by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. It would be the ultimate apology from Clinton to the LGBT world, and signify that he's not only changed his position on marriage equality, but he's also able to admit that sometimes politicians can screw up and put into law really bad pieces of legislation.
4. Endorse candidates who support full marriage equality. Clinton's endorsement powers are huge. Note the huge stink raised when he decided to throw his hat into the California 2010 Governor's race by endorsing pro-marriage equality candidate Gavin Newsom. That move is huge for Newsom, and certainly a welcome sign. It's dicey to place a litmus test on candidates, but on this issue, it's a real test of where a politician stands on equal rights. Endorsing candidates that don't support marriage equality -- if ever justified -- should be the exception, not the rule.
5. Lobby Obama. While it's great that the former President now supports marriage equality, there's still the problem of the current President believing that marriage equality isn't ready for prime time yet. Clinton might not have capacity to change the Obama administration's perogative on this issue. But it doesn't mean that Obama should be left off of the hook, either. There are ways for former Presidents to inform the politics of current Presidents. Clinton should take every opportunity to do so.
Share this Post
Related Posts
-
Obama to Extend Some Benefits to LGBT Federal Employees. It's not Enough.
-
Students vs. the Defense of Marriage Act
-
Basically, Bill Clinton Thinks it's OK for Gays and Lesbians to Marry
Comments (24)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Email



















"1. Go to Maine and campaign for marriage equality. Maine, as well all know, is in the midst of a ballot initiative that could repeal the rights of gays and lesbians to marry. The No on 1 campaign needs all the support it can get to beat down this ballot initiative (vote no on 1!), and Clinton's voice could certainly help lend a hand. Poll numbers show that the race is neck-and-neck. Clinton's voice could make a huge difference."
Hey, I'm working with the No on 1 campaign in Maine and I wanted to let you know that supporters can volunteer for us nationwide from home. For more information you can go to www.protectmaineequality.org or check out this facebook event... http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=136544189292&index=1
Thank you so much for giving this issue the publicity it desperately needs!
--Maggie
Posted by Margaret Campbell on 09/26/2009 @ 10:45AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Ha! Great article Mike, but that is like asking a lion to go vegan for the rest of its life.
Posted by Chris Marshall on 09/26/2009 @ 11:03AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Finally a respected politican on the side of logic. You cannot dictate that everone will be non gay. And who cares????
Posted by Cherokee Fred Jesus on 09/26/2009 @ 11:10AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
If bloggers like Mike keep writing articles like this than maybe more people will care!
Posted by Chris . on 09/26/2009 @ 12:34PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
It's a shame it took him so long to finally support same-sex marriage, but better late than never. It's nice to have someone else backing such an important issue.
Posted by Sarah McConnaughey on 09/26/2009 @ 01:58PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
It's good that Bill Clinton supports same-sex marriage. Since Bill Clinton now has a correct view of LGBT rights, he should definitely visit Maine for the No on 1 campaign and Washington to support domestic partnerships that are unfortunately on a referendum. The Respect for Marriage Act must become law which President Obama is obligated to sign, thus he should lobby President Obama to make sure he does the correct thing when it comes to LGBT rights.
Posted by Edwin Bonilla on 09/26/2009 @ 04:01PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I just hope he does do at least some of those things.
Posted by Thomas McHugh on 09/26/2009 @ 05:29PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I hope clintons actions encourage other politicians to support gay rights. For some reason there are few politicians to openly support our rights. I hope his actions is a big step toward's that.
Posted by Martin Martinez on 09/27/2009 @ 05:09AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Im thinking its because theyre still, foolishly, afraid of alienating the brainwashed followers of the fundietard preachers...
It could also be because theyve been brainwashed...
Posted by Thomas McHugh on 09/27/2009 @ 04:48PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
My apologies...
I meant to specify thats the reason why more dont support equality.
Posted by Thomas McHugh on 09/27/2009 @ 04:50PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Support all rights, which allows religious people to have theirs. The rights issue must not be complicated with various views of a topic or arguing these views. It is the right of freedom / liberty to be yourself. Fighting religious views is contrary to freedom to have them.
Posted by Bruce Eggum on 09/27/2009 @ 05:11PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I don't believe in this brainwashed stuff unless you are at a bin-laden boot camp. When you are a little fertilzed egg insided your mothers womb you didn't get to choose to be white, black, male or female or anything. You were born the way you are and if you born gay then you will grow up to be gay. We don't get to choose any of that stuff. That is what people who you call brainwashed don't get. Some actually think gay people chose that lifestyle. NOT TRUE! We were born that way. Now if you are confused about what your sexuality is because of religion or something like that then that is a different story. I refuse to believe that someone is or is not gay because of brainwashing. People eventually grow up to make up their own minds.
Posted by Chris . on 09/27/2009 @ 05:40PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Bruce that sentenced you just perspired is the same rhetoric christians used to support slavery, apartheid, and segregation.
"It is the right of freedom to be yourself, but religions freedoms must to be protected just as much as personal liberty." -General Robert E. Lee
"Fighting religions views..."
That right there is an oxymoron. So if religions feel slavery is ok and we should not fight it, why is slavery illegal now even though it was a once closely held religious belief? Even more controversial why is segregation illegal for those of different races, colors, ethnicity, religions, and ages now despite that once being a closely held religious belief; especially against black people? Those were once "traditional, god owned religious freedoms" to condemn and oppress people. Yet they are now illegal I wonder why that is? Hmmmm maybe because there is a line between religious freedom and using religion as an excuse for bigotry, as well as the denigration and destruction of innocent lives?
As Dave would say "religious freedoms end where my rights begin." Meaning religions can have what ever rights they want however, those rights stop at the moment they try to hurt or degrade the humanity of others. And by degrade I mean strip them or withhold from them their civil, human, constitutional rights.Telling a bigot they can no KILL an innocent because their religions tell them too is not stripping them of their constitutional rights of religion, it is simply protecting innocent people from insane, in-cognizant fundamentalist whack jobs.
Just a thought...
Posted by Chris Marshall on 09/28/2009 @ 05:45AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Reply to Chris and Chris... so fine. So true. It was proven in Swedish Twin Study that being gay is 95% genetic in malesk, 90% or so in females...
and as we all know Religion is 100% imposed and 'chosen' nothing genetic about it.
So keep yours to yourself Bruce...don't force it on me, and don't you dare use it as an excuse to break the Golden Rule!!!
Posted by Lee Dorsey on 09/28/2009 @ 09:08PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Lee you always have the best comments. Accurate and on topic. I love the way you sock it to them.
Posted by Chris . on 09/29/2009 @ 02:55PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Mr. eggum...
There are times when, in order for us to be who we are, whether we're heterosexual or homosexual or bisexual, that we have no choice but to fight those who misuse their religion as a justification for denying the rights of others who do no harm by their existance.
Posted by Thomas McHugh on 10/02/2009 @ 06:14PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I agree... this may just be the push that the DOMA needs to put it out of our misery!!! Not the best timing but, hey Better Late...! Dakotahgeo, Pastor/Chaplain
Posted by George M Melby, Pastor/Chap... on 09/27/2009 @ 05:22PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Chris Marshall, thank you so much! My feelings exactly. It would be interesting to ask these heterosexual people to be asexual for a week, maybe even a month, and see if they could do it, heh heh heh. After all, it IS a choice!
Too funny!
Dakotahgeo, M.Div. Pastor/Chaplain
Posted by George M Melby, Pastor/Chap... on 09/28/2009 @ 07:47AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Your quite welcome friend. Well there are people who try to go A, but turn out asshole, we call them Vatican Catholic Priest.
Posted by Chris Marshall on 10/09/2009 @ 08:51PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Actually Clinton was wrong again. Marriage equality should not be left up to the acceptance, tolerance, agreement or approval of heterosupremacist tyrannical theocRATS anywhere in America. If Clinton is really for marriage equality (being the expert on marriage like he is), he should stand up and say that the United States Constitution must be unconditional for all Americans, everywhere in America. He was the first out heterosupremacist in chief, and Obama is following in his jackboot step.
Now Clinton gave Obama his backing on this states rights nonsense. Candidate Obama said during the LOGO TV debate that he was against marriage equality, too, and that he would protect the rights of preachers not to conduct wedding ceremonies for same-sex couples. Preachers already have that right under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution guaranteeing them that Congress shall make no laws regarding their right to free religious expression.
Following Clinton's concepts, Obama supporters in California, Arizona, and Florida voted against marriage equality.
Only when the bronze age bible sun revolves around the flat earth theocRATS are stopped in this country, people will agree with Clinton that gay and lesbian Americans rights depend on heterosupremacist tyrants.
Posted by Planet Spinz on 09/28/2009 @ 10:37AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Fine and dandy, that he has changed his mind... NOW DO SOMETHING... heck even J Carter works at Habitat!
What does Billy do?
Posted by Lee Dorsey on 09/28/2009 @ 09:03PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
OK .... The issue is that the federal government is trying to socially engineer our society by offering 1000 + benefits toward a specific purpose. Getting rid of those benefits would create a level playing field for all.
If my spouse and I want to make a contract (marriage agreement) we can do it through the use of civil and or religious contract law...specify survivor benefits et al.
Posted by Gerald Grundstein on 10/01/2009 @ 01:48PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Mr. grundstein...
Why should we give up the benefits associated with marriage when it would make far more logical sense to simply allow for all americans to have those priveleges no matter what the sexual orientation of the marital partners is ?
Posted by Thomas McHugh on 10/02/2009 @ 06:19PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Some people to rot far from the logic tree.
Posted by Chris Marshall on 10/09/2009 @ 08:50PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.