Equality Issue Separates Virginia Democratic Candidates
Representative Rob Wittman, a Republican from Virginia’s 1st congressional district, is not the sort of person who could be described as enlightened when it comes to LGBT issues. Just before he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, Wittman, as a delegate to Virginia’s state legislature, signed a statement promising that his office would not discriminate against people on the basis of sexual orientation. That’s a nice promise, but that vote came shortly after Wittman voted in favor of legislation to forbid Virginia from recognizing not just same-sex marriage, but also any other alternative forms of relationships crafted by other states, such as domestic partnerships or civil unions. Wittman was so out of touch on LGBT issues that he couldn’t comprehend the contradiction.
The good news for residents of the 1st district of Virginia who care about issues of equality is that Representative Wittman will certainly face a Democratic challenger in the 2010 election. The bad news is that one of the candidates running for the Democratic nomination has attitudes about LGBT issues that are as regressive as Wittman’s.
The political news resource Blue Virginia has interviewed both Democratic candidates for Congress in the 1st district, and asked them specifically about their positions on LGBT issues.
Krystal Ball gave a strong reply, stating, “I am 100% committed to full LGBT equality at every level including repealing “DADT”, allowing full marriage equality and I am in full support of hate crimes legislation.” On her campaign web site, Ball writes, “I support full equality under the law for gays, lesbians and the entire LGBT community.”
Scott Robinson, the other Democratic candidate running for the chance to take on Rob Wittman, does not mention LGBT issues at all on his campaign web site. In response to Blue Virginia’s question, Robinson acknowledged that:
- He supports the discriminatory military policy Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.
- He opposes legalizing same-sex marriage.
- He supports allowing states to take the authority to deny marriage equality, in spite of the Constitution’s clear ban on inequality under the law, regardless of state government efforts to discriminate.
For Democratic voters in Virginia’s 1st district who care about equality, the choice in the 2010 congressional primary is clear: Vote Krystal Ball to take a stand against the Democratic Party’s slide into Republican-style support for discrimination.
Blue Virginia is far from a news source, first off.
Second off every state that has put gay marriage on the ballot, gay marriage has been banned by the voters. I agree that the defense of marriage act should be ended on a federal level, I also agree with any stat that bans it due to a vote. The Constitution has nothing regarding marriage in it, no where does it same anything about marriage equality. Maybe you liberals should read it some time.
Third Hate Crimes laws are the dumbest, biggest waste of time for elected representatives to write, waste time to vote and ETC. Every crime is committed with some form of hate, what is the point of adding 7 years for a so called “hate crime” to a life sentence, it is pointless. Where in the Constitution does it say the federal government can regulate whether they think you hate somebody?
Garrett, Blue Virginia reports news. That makes it a news source.
The Constitution certainly does pertain to marriage equality, given that marriage equality is a form of equality under the law, which is guaranteed to ALL people, not just the heterosexual ones, by the Constitution of the United States of America.
This article didn’t talk about hate crimes legislation.
I see that the name of your blog is On The Right, and that you advertise in favor of the re-election of Republican Rob Wittman. Do you believe that Democrats should veer to the right? If so, do you agree that Scott Robinson would be the more right wing candidate than Krystal Ball?
Umm, yes it does talk about hate crimes read Mrs. Ball’s quote. I think marriage law should be left up to the sates, to be honest, I could care less either way, Virginia voters overwhelming passed a ban on gay marriage, I am in favor of civil unions, but not marriage, now where in the constitution does it say equal protection for a guy to marry a guy, or anything to that substance, if that was the case wouldn’t polygamy be legal then? Another question, where in the Constitution does it say a women can kill a living breathing baby?
Blue Virginia is a political blog, they take real news and slant it to the left, just like my blog takes news and slants it to the right or has an opinion of it from a conservative prospective. you saying Blue Virginia is a news source is like saying Wikipedia is a great academic source.
As far as Robinson and Ball go, i hope Krystal gets nominated, because it will be an extremely easy reelection for Wittman.
Garrett, I hope that you realize how dishonest the argument against equality you just made is.
Where in the Constitution does it say that African-American children are entitled to access to public education that is equal to that given to European-American children? It doesn’t because it doesn’t have to. It guarantees equal protection for all people and declares that no state shall have the power to deny that equality.
That’s in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States. Are you in favor of repealing the Fourteenth Amendment?
What does the House of Representatives have to do with the 14th Amendment, they do not nominate judges, ETC.
You set a bad precedent if you allow the age old tradition of marriage being between a man and women. Whats next will you allow people to marry animals, polygamy, and child marriages? A civil union is the same as marriage with out the title, why not allow that. Another thought it was liberal activists judges that said separate but equal was fine.
How you figured out that Blue Virginia, is not a news source as of yet?
Mr. Wilson’s arguments mirror exactly the arguments against interracial marriage. Let black and white people marry each other, they said forty years ago, and soon we’ll be marrying our dogs!
Treat Mr. Wilson’s claim with the same level of seriousness you would devote to the 1960s “negro=dog” claim.
P.S. Mr. Wilson, the 14th Amendment in this has to do with equal protection under law, not the nomination of judges. And the last clause of the 14th Amendment reads “The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”