Each presidential election seems to propagate itself as the most important or pivotal in our history. Every cycle of candidates focuses on the continuous decline of the American dream and why someone else’s party is responsible for this cultural erosion. If that is the case, then we as a society have never experienced any positive growth, only a long downward spiral. This, of course, is simply not true.

However, the 2008 presidential elections may, in fact, be one of the most important in recent times. This is especially true in terms of the potential consequences for LGBTQ people and their allies. Alongside difficult situations concerning the economy and America’s role in the international community, this election will also bring several human rights issues and domestic quality of life challenges into sharp focus. With so many people in various parties running for so many positions, it can be difficult to know how to choose. But choose you must. It is your duty as a citizen.

A conscious choice not to vote out of a sense of protest can be a statement; however, not exercising the right to vote because of laziness, apathy and cynicism undermines the health and stability of our republic. People who do not vote (but who complain about the status quo anyway) are socially irresponsible. Your voice does matter. Do not squander the chance to make your position known. It matters little which individual or party you prefer, so long as you have made a selection that rings true with your conscience.

Showing up to vote is an excellent first step, but it is equally important to come to the polls with a plan of action. Selecting unknown names is not helpful. Voting down party lines without regard to the personalities involved is reckless (as can be shown in Bob Conley, the Democratic nominee running against Lindsey Graham in South Carolina for the U.S. Senate, who would be a disaster for LGBTQ voters). Being an active, informed citizen gives you the ability to make an intelligent decision about giving power to the people who will then create the environment in which you live. Playing eenie-meenie-miney-mo is a dangerous method for handing command of a situation to a nominee.

“But I’m marginalized, so my opinion doesn’t matter anyway.” Yes. It does. It matters a great deal. You matter so much to bigots that your life is an issue requiring homophobic legislation. The LGBTQ vote has become an ever more important factor for consideration. There are now enough openly LGBTQ voters who are registered that we can make the difference in swinging contests. If LGBTQ issues weren’t important, and if LGBTQ people didn’t matter, Karl Rove would have tried a different tactic in 2004, and the Democratic National Convention wouldn’t have included LGBTQ delegates in 2008. Your vote counts. Lingering skepticism over the re-counts in Florida can not be a deterrent. Just as the 9/11 attacks failed to undermine our nation, the 2000 election between Bush and Gore should fail to undermine our trust in the longest surviving constitutional system in the world. Vote.

Candidates offer varying degree

       of inclusion to LGBTQ voters

by JACK KIRVEN

It is true that there is a large menu of polarizing topics in the current cultural landscape. Challenges concerning foreign nations, immigrants, reproductive rights, health care and insurance, economic strategies, energy resources, environmental advocacy, infrastructure, and basic human and civil rights are all coming to a head simultaneously. These are extremely volatile days. An explosive mix has already been churned up throughout the world as huge financial institutions collapse and rogue nations threaten nuclear proliferation. And now, here in the middle of all this rancor, we have LGBTQ people having the audacity to aggressively demand equality.

And why not?

It is becoming so abundantly obvious that transformation is the only means of survival that even Republican candidates are now seeking to align themselves with maverick status, or are willing to usurp the roll of “agent of change,” simply to not be associated with the total and utter failure of the current regime. This is arguably the best time to put forth LGBTQ demands – if everything else is being revolutionized (in hypothetical terms, at least), why not simple, unfettered full citizen status for the homos?

It would be an enormous undertaking to analyze every candidate in North and South Carolina in general, let alone along specific LGBTQ-affirming guidelines. Here then is an overview of many of the nominees running for President, Vice President, US Senate, Governor, and Lieutenant Governor. There is also special mention of LGBTQ candidates running in particular races, in case you happen to live in an area where a selection for these particular candidates is possible on the ballot. The candidates’ positions are summarized here as they pertain to LGBTQ-specific policies.

Presidential Candidates

Barack Obama-D co-sponsored legislation to expand hate crimes protections to include LGBTQ people.  Hate crimes legislation allow crimes committed because of bigotry to be handled at the federal level, and therefore bring more legal weight, resources, and protection than state offices can often afford. Obama also supports a Trans-inclusive version of the Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA), which would protect LGBTQ people from being fired because of their sexuality, gender expression, or gender identity.

Obama supports a repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT), and in 2004 he voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA). The FMA would have placed an amendment into the U.S. Constitution defining marriage for the entire nation as a union between one man and one woman, negating state laws to the contrary. Voting against FMA places Obama in the camp that believes adults should be allowed to make their own decisions about their personal relationships. Obama is mixed on the marriage issue, however. Although he does not support gay marriage, he does support federal protection for domestic partnerships and civil unions, saying insurance, property, inheritance, and other rights should be extended to them. Obama has said that his spiritual beliefs force him to keep the term marriage reserved for religious ceremonies, which cannot be defined by laws. In 1996, Obama voted against the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). DOMA says that a same sex marriage recognized in one state does not have to be treated as valid in any other state, and it also stipulates that the federal government is barred from treating same sex relationships as marriages even if they are recognized by a state. Obama also supports LGBTQ adoption and parenting rights.

John McCain-R did not support the Matthew Shepard Act of 2007, which would have expanded hate crimes protections to include LGBTQ victims of violence (if it had not been dropped, despite passing in the Senate by a vote of 60-39). The bill did not have veto-proof support, because it was tied to military funding legislation, and when George W. Bush threatened to block the bill, it died. McCain also rejects ENDA. He wants to keep DADT in place, and although he voted against FMA in 2004 he supported a failed similar amendment for the state of Arizona in 2006. McCain believes marriage issues and extension of benefits should be left to the states to decide. He does not support benefits for unmarried couples, thus precluding benefits for domestic partnerships. He supported DOMA in 1996, and reaffirmed his support of this legislation in 2004. McCain does not support LGBTQ adoption and parenting rights.

Vice Presidential Candidates

Joe Biden-D supports hate crimes legislation that is LGBTQ inclusive. He was also a co-sponsor of the Local Law Enforcement Act of 2005. He is also a supporter of a Trans-inclusive version of ENDA, believing that all people should be equally protected under the law. Biden says that he would seek to repeal DADT, noting that no one in the fox holes in the heat of battle ever asks someone whether or not s/he is gay while they’re in the midst of fighting. Biden has made the argument that the armies in Europe and Israel allow soldiers who are openly LGBTQ to serve.

Biden, like Obama, does not support gay marriage. He makes the argument that marriage is a religious ceremony that is not subject to legal prerogatives. In order to prevent discrimination against LGBTQ families, however, he did vote against FMA. Although he sees marriage as a separate function, he does support domestic partnerships and civil unions. He also supports extending the rights of marriage to people in alternative long term relationships. Unique to his view is the notion that LGBTQ citizens who have partners from other countries should receive the same immigration treatment as heterosexual couples. Biden supports same-sex adoption, and believes in legally protecting LGBTQ families’ rights. One blip on the screen: Biden supported DOMA in 1996.

Sarah Palin-R does not have much to say on record on any issues at all, given her recent introduction to the national spotlight. What is available, however, paints a picture that is not LGBTQ-inclusive. Although she and McCain claim to be party mavericks, McCain voted with Bush 100 percent of the time in 2008 and 95 percent of the time in 2007. Throughout the course of his 26-year career he has voted with his party, on average, over 88 percent of the time.

In her 2006 run for governor Palin did not support LGBTQ inclusion for hate crimes protections. She does not support ENDA. She is not on record about DADT. However, she is vehemently opposed to LGBTQ marriage or extending benefits to domestic partners, regardless of the sexualities of the people involved. Palin’s church has come under scrutiny because her pastor has announced that homosexuality can be reversed through the power of prayer. Her position on DOMA is not public record, but her attitudes suggest staunch support for this type of legislation. Given her other position statements it can also be surmised that she would not be expected to support LGBTQ adoption or other forms of protection for alternative families.

U.S. Senatorial Candidates: North Carolina

Christopher Cole-L is the Libertarian candidate running for the U.S. Senate in an attempt to unseat current incumbent Elizabeth Dole. When contacted by OIA, he was very happy to speak directly and eloquently about his positions on LGBTQ issues. Cole lives in Huntersville, just north of Charlotte, and is openly gay.

When asked if he supports hate crimes legislation, Cole responded, “I think all violent crime should be treated the same. I don’t like listing separate groups, because then you get into legislating thought; however, if other groups are listed, so should gay people. I think everyone should be equally represented, thus doing away with the need to single anyone out.” The same all or none philosophy applies to Cole’s opinions of ENDA. “If the law was applied consistently, you wouldn’t need to mention anyone in particular.” Since that has not been the case, Cole says he supports policies that are “equal under the law.”
Cole believes adamantly that DADT should be repealed.

As for marriage, civil unions, and domestic partnerships, Cole states his support for justice by reaffirming his allegiance to the notion of “equal under the law.” He repeats it enough for it to be clear that this is one of his political mantras. Cole wants all people, regardless of subcultural groupings, to enjoy all the same benefits and opportunities. Either everyone should be given equality under the law, or else all benefits should be removed for everyone, thus relegating everyone to equality under the law. Believing that people should be free to enter contracts without interference from government, Cole also believes that DOMA should be repealed.

In all ways, including LGBTQ adoption, family rights, and bullying policies at schools, Cole feels strongly that LGBTQ people should be treated equally under the law. He clarified that the only reason he feels LGBTQ children should be mentioned specifically in anti-bullying legislation is to bring the possibility of this type of harassment to the attention of teachers who might not otherwise recognize it as a motive for some students to mistreat others. Otherwise, as with his position on ENDA and anything else, all students should be equally protected from bullying. The fundamental difference between Liberals (i.e. Democrats) as a whole and Libertarians as whole (in terms of accepting diversity amongst people) is that while both groups seek equality under the law, Democrats seek to enforce this through laws while Libertarians (who reject almost any form of government interference) rely on each individual’s conscience.

Kay Hagan-D at first repeatedly declined to run against Elizabeth Dole; however, when Jim Neal (an openly gay man) announced his campaign, the Democratic Party snubbed him and pressured Hagan to run. Hagan won the Democratic primary. She has lived in Raleigh for ten years and is familiar with the people and procedures that surround the state government. While some will appreciate that this means she is connected and knowledgeable, others will protest that she is an insider. Hagan does not support LGBTQ marriage; however, she has said that she supports domestic partnerships and benefits for those relationships. She has co-sponsored a Trans-inclusive nondiscrimination bill in the North Carolina general assembly. She also supports a repeal of DADT. She has said that she will support hate crimes legislation in Washington, D.C. Her position on DOMA and bullying could not be confirmed as of press time, nor could her stance on LGBTQ adoption and family protections.

Elizabeth Dole-R allegedly spends almost no time at all in the state she claims to represent, so it is debatable as to where she lives. Dole issued a formal statement that “Marriage between a man and a woman isn’t something Republicans invented, but it is something Republicans will defend.” She voted in support of FMA. She does not support ENDA. She is rated at 0 percent by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), which indicates an anti-gay voting record. She is rated at 100 percent by the Christian Coalition, which indicates a “pro-family” voting record. Over the course of 311 votes cast, she has sided with her party over 91 percent of the time.

U.S. Senatorial Candidates: South Carolina

Bob Conley-D is not what would be expected from a typical Democratic nominee. LGBTQ voters in South Carolina should exercise caution in simply voting down party lines. In this instance the candidate is even more conservative than his Republican opponent. Conley describes himself as a “pro-life, anti-gay marriage” candidate who measures up just fine against Lindsey Graham on social issues. Local Democrats have lamented him as “a Republican who has won the Democratic primary.” SC Governor, and Conley’s opponent, Lindsey Graham has stated that “Conley is to the right of me.” This is unsettling, as the description of Graham below will show. LGBTQ voters are encouraged to write in a vote, rather than simply selecting the Democrat in this race.

Lindsey Graham-R voted “Yes” to ban LGBTQ marriage by means of a Constitutional Amendment. His support of FMA and other anti-gay legislation is noted, despite long term continuing rumors that he himself, like Larry Craig and other Republicans, is living in the closet. He voted to ban LGBTQ adoptions in 1999, and is rated at 0 percent by the ACLU, which indicates an anti-civil rights voting history. He is rated at 0 percent by HRC, which indicates an anti-gay voting history. He is rated at 100 percent by the Christian Coalition, which indicates a “pro family” voting history. Over the course of 312 votes cast, he has sided with his party nearly 88 percent of the time.

Gubernatorial Candidates: North Carolina

Michael “Mike” Munger-L, like the other Libertarians in this guide, follows the principle of “equal under the law.” Whereas the Libertarian nominees may or may not be strictly in favor of LGBTQ protections and marriage/family issues, they adamantly oppose laws that discriminate. Munger, however, does support LGBTQ marriage, and he also supports domestic partnerships and benefits that are equal to the status and protection afforded under the law to anyone else. He also supports family and adoption protections. Munger told OIA that, “The issue of mistreatment of LGBTQ people is one of the fundamental reasons I chose to run in this race. It is not right to discriminate against them for any reason.”

Beverly Perdue-D opposes a constitutional ban on LGBTQ marriage in North Carolina. She personally prohibits discrimination against LGBTQ employees in her office as Lieutenant Governor, and has said specifically that she would enforce that expectation across the state government as Governor. She has also said that she would honor civil unions and domestic partnerships. The specifics of whether or not she supports benefits, adoption, anti-bullying, and other details could not be confirmed; however, given her other position statements it could be inferred that she would support these rights.

Pat McCrory-R is not vocal about his opinions concerning LGBTQ issues. His positions could not be confirmed.

Gubernatorial Nominees: South Carolina
South Carolina does not have a race for Governor in the 2008 election cycle. The position won’t be up for election again until 2010.

Lieutenant Gubernatorial Candidates: North Carolina

Phillip Rhodes-L repeats the same philosophy as the other candidates in the Libertarian party. Although he does not support specific legislation that includes LGBTQ protections he is adamant that all people, regardless of their affiliations, are to be treated equally under the law. He told OIA that “government exists to protect our rights, period.”

Walter Dalton-D is not particularly vocal about his opinions concerning LGBTQ issues; however, what little information is available paints a mixed picture. He reached out to the LGBTQ community by attending several EqualityNC events and its gala; however, he also signed on in support of the amendment to the North Carolina constitution that would have banned same-sex marriage (which so far has failed to pass multiple times, making North Carolina the only state in the South to not have a constitutional ban against LGBTQ marriage).

Robert Pittenger-R is not vocal about his opinions concerning LGBTQ issues. His positions could not be confirmed.

Local elections with LGBTQ nominees: North Carolina

Judge John Arrowood was appointed to replace Eric Levinson on the North Carolina Court of Appeals after Levinson resigned in order to take a position in Iraq. Arrowood was put onto the court by Governor Mike Easley, despite the fact that Arrowood is openly gay. Now that the term Levinson originally won is coming to its end, it is time for Arrowood to defend his position in a public election. Arrowood was born, raised, and has spent his entire professional life in North Carolina, making him very knowledgeable of the state and its needs. He is the first openly LGBTQ judge on the North Carolina Court of Appeals. He is running statewide, so voters throughout North Carolina can vote in support of his campaign.

Senator Julia Boseman-D represents District 9 in the North Carolina Senate. She supports anti-discrimination legislation, and seeks to include LGBTQ constituents in matters pertaining to their equality. She supported the anti-bullying bill that is LGBTQ-inclusive, so that gay youth will be treated more fairly and will feel safer at school. She is openly lesbian. She was first elected in 2004, defeating the incumbent Republican, and was successfully re-elected in 2006. Voters in North Carolina who live in New Hanover County can vote in support of her campaign.

Local elections with LGBTQ nominees: South Carolina

Linda Ketner-D is running to represent South Carolina’s 1st Congressional District in Washington, D.C. As a member of the House of Representatives she would support all measures and policies that are supportive and inclusive of the LGBTQ community. She is openly lesbian. Ketner founded the Alliance for Full Acceptance, an organization that pursues social justice and is inclusive of LGBTQ people. Ketner also founded the South Carolina Equality Coalition, which works to secure civil rights and human rights for the state’s LGBTQ citizens. Voters in South Carolina who live in or near Berkeley, Charleston, Dorchester, Georgetown, or Horry Counties can vote in support of her campaign.

James Akers, Jr. is campaigning to represent District 24 of Greenville on the County Council. He is openly gay. His top priorities include improving the plan for city expansion, so as not to ruin natural resources; improving the maintenance of roads, so that commerce is free to grow; to improve interaction between the council and the public by holding town hall meetings once a month; and expanding the council to also include at-large members, who would hold district members accountable to the entire community, not only to their personal constituents.

 

The 2008 elections offer many opportunities for you as an LGBTQ voter in the Carolinas to make choices that will gradually improve equality for everyone in our community. It is very important to make informed selections. Although this guide is not exhaustive, hopefully it will be a tool that can help you become more informed about the decisions you make while at the polling station. For more information, see www.OnTheIssues.org, www.eQualityGiving.org, and www.VoteSmart.org.