Gay media outlets rap Kerry's silence in marriage debate
WASHINGTON -- Some of the nation's most influential gay media outlets have begun assailing a onetime ally, Senator John F. Kerry, for his silence in the current Massachusetts debate over banning same-sex marriage in the state Constitution.
Two years ago Kerry urged state legislators to reject a proposed amendment banning gay marriages and civil unions.
In Newsweekly, which describes itself as New England's largest newspaper for gays and lesbians, published an editorial this week calling Kerry "shameful" for not taking a stand on the set of proposed state amendments.
"No one is asking him to engage in a fight, merely to stand up against enshrining discrimination in the state's ruling document," the editorial stated. "And if he can't even do that, then he is not a candidate worthy of gay and lesbian support."
The Washington Blade, a newspaper here, also recently questioned Kerry's record on gay issues, which has been touted by both his campaign and major gay-right groups, such as the Human Rights Campaign.
Both In Newsweekly and the Blade took aim at the credit some gay leaders have given Kerry for opposing the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which banned federal recognition of gay marriage. The papers suggested that Kerry voted against the act, in 1996, only because his rival in that year's Senate reelection race, William F. Weld, had a better gay-rights record.
Chris Crain, who wrote the Blade piece about Kerry and is editorial director for Window Media, a chain of six gay-themed newspapers, said the senator was hypocritical for being mum on the Massachusetts debate while coming out against the Defense of Marriage Act.
"This is a critical civil rights issue in John Kerry's home state -- why would he let others define the debate?" Crain said.
Two years ago, Kerry signed a letter with other members of the state's congressional delegation urging the Massachusetts Legislature to drop a constitutional amendment outlawing gay marriage and, potentially, civil unions.
Kerry's campaign said yesterday he has consistently opposed gay marriage while also rejecting legislation, such as the 2002 amendment, that he believed threatened the civil rights and recognition of gay relationships, because it was so broadly worded.
"He opposed a proposed constitutional amendment in Massachusetts in the summer of 2002, because a sweeping proposal would have threatened civil unions, health benefits, or inheritance rights for gay couples that represent equal protection under the law," David Wade, a Kerry spokesman, said yesterday.
Kerry's advisers have urged him to sidestep the same-sex marriage issue in Massachusetts for as long as possible, worried about the political harm of joining a rancorous debate where there is no firm amendment language and he might have little influence.
Wade reviewed the senator's 19-year record of support for gay-related legislation yesterday and noted Kerry's support for state-sanctioned civil unions.
"In Massachusetts, he has been clear that he supports civil unions, not gay marriage, and that we need legal analysis to determine what impact any amendment would have on equal protection and civil unions," Wade said.
While Kerry has not taken a stand on the current state constitutional amendment -- he chose not to sign a similar delegation letter written last month -- he has been a longtime critic of amending the US Constituiton to ban gay marriage. Kerry has said he opposes a federal amendment, because marriage is a state licensing issue. He has also noted that Massachusetts is compelled to examine the issue, because the state Supreme Judicial Court has permitted marriage licenses to be issued to gays starting in mid-May.
Asked why Kerry would oppose a federal amendment banning gay marriage, but not take a stand against such an amendment for the Massachusetts Constitution, Wade said: "It is unclear whether a state amendment would endanger civil unions."
Patrick Healy can be reached at phealy@globe.com.
