Home Featured Gay Marriage and the 2012 DNC Platform

Gay Marriage and the 2012 DNC Platform


With the election of Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1932, most people will argue that the Democratic Party answered the constantly ringing phone of progressivism. While the answer to that call has not always been as quick as it should be, it eventually receives a responder. We can point to the New Deal and it’s social welfare programs or the progressive policies of the Johnson administration and see that a lot of what has made America a better nation is because of visions and steps that not only people took, but also the Democratic Party itself. However, the issue of same-sex marriage is one that usually brings vitriolic debate with little to no results or more of a regression of rights that should be afforded to ALL Americans. Whatever side of the fence you may sit on this issue, we as a nation must debate this topic fairly and judiciously so that we continue to perfect our union.

The Decision

Just this past weekend, a 15-member Democratic National Committee (DNC) Platform Committee met and decided that for its 2012 National Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina same-sex marriage language deserves a place on the DNC platform. However, this is only a draft that has to be sent to the full platform committee for final approval. Many will attribute this to President Obama officially coming out in favor of same-sex marriage earlier this year. One is forced to think, however, how intense the pressure has been from LGBT groups in regards to this issue. The clock of progression is ticking and it seems the Democratic party wants to be on the right side of history. With this issue we must always remember:

“History…is a clock that people use to tell their political time of day. It is also a compass that people use to find themselves on the map of human geography. History tells a people where they have been and what they have been. It also tells a people where they are and what they are. Most importantly, history tells a people where they still must go and what they still must be.”

In realizing that, we as a nation must dare to recognize our cultural foundations. Furthermore, we must continually be cognizant of the fact that America was founded upon ideas, and principles as opposed to many of her predecessor or successor nations. It is in that which remains our ability to seriously consider an issue such as same-sex marriage with more sincerity and less hate. After all our nation has survived 230+ years for the simple fact that we have been at our best when we continue to remember that we the people includes all of THE PEOPLE. So this decision by the Democratic Party is bold and audacious, yet it will be the cause of great firestorm.

See Also:  The "Stay Here" Theory: A Lesson in What Men DON'T Say

What Does This Mean?

There will be a great deal of adulation and backlash that comes from this, especially if the full committee votes to send this to Charlotte for the September national convention. What makes this issue that much deeper and symbolic is that, North Carolina is a state that passed a law in May of this year banning same-sex marriages. (Six states: Iowa, Vermont, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York and Connecticut have legalized same sex-marriage). Many pundits will argue that the Democrats will be hurt by swing voters in crucial states if they move forward with this plan. Others argue that this is just what the Democratic Party needs to boost its base for this upcoming fall election in which they seek to keep control of the Presidency, take back the House of Representatives, and add to their anemic majority in the Senate.

In my opinion, the Party is doing the right thing again. Just as they added civil rights to their plank in 1948 prompting a walk out by it’s vicious racist and segregationist. These are rights; human rights that ALL people should be able to enjoy. If we are to live to the true words of our dear Declaration, Constitution and founding principles then we must adhere at all times to the timeless credo which says: ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. This goes for our LGBT brothers and sisters as well. They have this right and we shouldn’t deny them with regressive tools such as “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” (which has been repealed), The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), and other mechanisms the government uses to take away rights instead of expanding upon them as our founders intended.

See Also:  Can You Upgrade from an Ex?

Most people will throw out that the sanctity of marriage is under attack and that the wrath of God himself is upon America for fooling around in such “folly.” However, these same people in that same breath will claim to love America and be true patriots. This is a bit esoteric and disconcerting for a myriad of reasons, chiefly because these people have failed to recognize what America represents and is supposed to be. How can we perfect our Union if we consistently allow for the regression or extinction of certain rights? Let’s continue to focus on the things that make us better and not the things that tear us apart as a nation. Including ALL people in this discussion is the only way we can achieve the perfection of our great nation, which remains the envy of the world.

SBM Family what are your thoughts on the DNC Platform Committee Decision? Does this help or hurt the debate in our nation? Does it help or hurt President Obama’s reelection chances? Talk to me!


  1. I want to read comments. Where are they?
    I don't wanna read a politically correct writer writing politically correct stuff. I just come here to see the people battle it out in the comment section.

    1. And by the way, can we have a MOST REPLY in the comment section. There's a LAST ACTIVITY, a RATING, and a DATE, why not a MOST REPLY? I just want to read what the people are talking about…thanks.

  2. I think its great the the democrats are putting this plan into action. I’m not sure if will hurt them, I mean there, I’m sure their is a population in north Carolina that will appreciate this progression. I known one of the big questions is ” while this scare away black Christian voters”? I hope it doesn’t I think Obama is doing good in a lot of areas and hopefully they don’t let this one “stale mate ” stop them from voting for him.

    I never understood the whole sanctity of marriage argument. I went to a Catholic based college. When i took Christian marriage they told us a marriage was only sacred (under the lord) if you married in an actually church. If you get married at the justice of peace then it’s just the legally binding part. ( according to them). But live and let.

  3. "what are your thoughts on the DNC Platform Committee Decision?"

    my thoughts? "Give to Caesar, what is Caesars". i guess now the concept of marriage, is..Caesar's.

    "Does this help or hurt the debate in our nation?"

    i'm not sure that this will necessarily gain voters to the Democratic platform, considering the overwhelming majority of people that agree with this position, either vote Democratic (or further left)..it probably will leads to groups (maybe a few, maybe much) to base their final choice on their personal beliefs.

  4. Does it help or hurt President Obama’s reelection chances? – Against Romney?! *LMBO*

    Naw. He's good. If he had a better opponent, maybe.

    1. As much as I would like to agree with you, check the margins.. Obama is not up by a landslide, and that's taking into consideration his opponent is a fcuking joke.

      1. Was he up by a landslide prior to his "announcement"? Lol…

        If he was, point taken. If not, its safe to say this didn't hurt him.

  5. To be honest, I don't know. I think the DNC is letting it "get good to them." (Richard Pryor reference). I have very little doubt in my mind that they will take the presidency in this upcoming election. I can't say the same for the Senate or House in those upcoming elections. It's very important to note that about 26% of Americans voters don't' vote don't vote down party lines, they pick and choose each year. That's leaves about 37% on each side, Dem or Rep. You can't win an election with just 37%. You have to convince the middle to vote for you. The majority of our country's population and electoral votes is in rural America. Re: John Kerry and Al Gore, great guys, however, because GW Bush was able to control the rural American vote, he cleaned up. That's the danger of adding something like this to your agenda, you start risking large portions of your electoral votes.

    The good thing about this is that while rural America may not agree with Gay Marriage, they damn sure don't have a clue what the Mormon church is about and that makes them hesitant. Also, blue collar workers and farmers want someone they can relate to, and Romney is so far disconnected from them. It will be interesting to see. I think it's the right thing to do, morally. But moral victories are for minor league coaches.

  6. I'm a bit hesitant to jump on the bandwagon for a few reasons. I will preface this by saying I believe two grown consenting adults should be able to do whatever the hell they want with each other. But my main concerns are:

    1) A Definitive Stance: No one has yet to even properly label what it is we are fighting FOR. Let's be real. Marriage is NOT a human right, or even a civil one. Humans were not "born to marry", and technically you can marry a cow if you have a ceremony. What the LGBT community is fighting for is the right for their unions to be equally recognized, and receiving of benefits, from the government. Part of the problem is no one is speaking in black & white terms, and it has become an emotional issue where people are fighting for the right ot marry in a church (which has NOTHING to do with ANYTHING), talking about human rights, and other completely irrelevant issues. The topic is just too muddy to take on.

    1. 2) Rhetoric. The RNC will UNDOUBTABLY take advantage of this. They are FAR superior at creating taglines, slogans, and memorable quotes to fire up their base during campaign time, HOWEVER untrue, rediculous or nonsensical (remember 'death panels'? The strategic use of 'Hussein'? The entire 'Birther' & 'Tea Party' movement?). No matter how supportive people are in public, those slogans will come back to them in the privacy of the voting booth (just ask California). I absolutely think this is something to be tackled, just by an administration not necessarily during a campaign.

    2. Humans are not born to vote either… soooo Voting Rights Act was muddy? No one is arguing for the right to marry in a church. As it stands now everyone can't marry in every church. That's not the point. Marriage is absolutely a civil right, that every consenting adult should have equal access to. As civil and human rights just all boil down to equality and there isn't anything muddy about that. Go DNC.

  7. You said the magic word repeatedly. Rights.

    This is not a religious or moral debate, it's a human rights discussion. Just as pro-choice doesn't mean pro-abortion. You don't have to "agree" with the gay lifestyle and we don't need to discuss if you think people are born gay or choose to be gay and Leviticus has less than nothing to do with the law.

    Allowing gay couples to marry and receive the same LEGAL rights as straight married couples is not a stamp of approval saying that they are now "good people" or without sin or forging their ticket into Heaven. They have nothing to do with one another. It's simply saying that since they live as a couple and have dedicated themselves to one another that they can claim each other on their taxes, that they can have joint custody of children they have together, that they can make legal and medical decisions for one another, like all other married people.

    1. It really is sorta hilarious to me that marriage suddenly becomes sacred when it’s two men or women trying to wed, but we watch shows like the Bachelor and The Kardashians and Love in the Wild. In a lot of states if two straight people simply live together in sin they are automatically granted common law marriage rights whether they want them or not. But loving gay couples, shoot even the ones taking advantage of the laws for the benefits that aren’t so loving, they can’t? Ludicrous.

      Forget your personal opinion on homosexuals.
      Forget your religious affiliation.
      Disregard how much you just LOVE that chicken.
      Try to fight your urge to be the morality police.
      The question is, do you think people’s RIGHTS should be determined by personal characteristics? Are civil rights optional?

      I say no #AndUSir?

  8. So the Republicans elect a big business, bank loving moderate that's a Mormon, who introduced his own version of nationalized health care, for their candidate for the presidency.

    The Democrats, while watching the reaction to the Chick-Fil-A gay marriage issue in real time, think it's a good time to make gay marriage officially a plank of the Democratic party.

    If I didn't know any better, I'd think both sides are trying to throw the election, Chinese badminton style.

  9. I agree with @Amaris_Acosta, in that I feel Democrats (especially since the advent of Howard Dean and Barack Obama's utilization of social media) are politicizing the issue for their personal gain. If you check the poll numbers, Obama was actually doing pretty poorly (in terms of fundraising and polls) compared to Romney in the weeks leading up to his announcement supporting gay marriage. Then he came out for it, and his numbers (and pockets) swelled significantly.

    My own personal stance aside, believe it or not, Twitter and Facebook doesn't represent everyone's political views. There are two entire generations of Americans who will seriously consider voting against Obama and the DNC for supporting gay marriage– it was simply a more-ingrained moral problem back then.

    I don't believe now was the time for the DNC to make it a platform issue (and unabashedly pander to the young vote– successfully, I might add), especially because their essentially already the party of same-sex marriage support. Reinforcing it won't really get them more votes.

    1. I think you're right in the sense that you say they are the party of same sex marriage, but lip-service and actually doing something to prove it is far more important.

      The Kennedy's said they supported civil rights legislation, but through lip service only. But, Johnson came through and actually did the work to make it happen with the CRA and VRA of 64 and 65.

  10. I just met a chocolate older man by Google or Bing ~~ [ BlackAgeGap_c0m ] ~~ It’s where for Black Older men seeking younger women. & . Mature black women dating younger men
    It’s a nice place for black older sing'les, to interact with each other, I just want to say:: Love me Love my color

  11. Great article until the very end, "…which remains the envy of the world." Wow!! Really?! I think you might have gotten this one wrong! Maybe an article where you elaborate on this…?


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Get SBM Delivered

Get SBM Delivered

Single Black Male provides dating and relationship
advice for today's single looking for love

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This