Kay Hagan Wants An Opportunity for Gay Marriage

Two recent Dome posts highlight Kay Hagan's position on gay marriage.

One points out that Hagan has opposed a state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, and would oppose a similar amendment at the federal level as well.

It reports:

Spokeswoman Colleen Flanagan said Hagan opposes both amendments.

"Kay believes that marriage is between a man and a woman, and this is fundamentally a state issue," she said. "She would not support a federal amendment defining marriage. Here in North Carolina, there is a law that she supports that says marriage is defined as a relationship between a man and a woman, and she sees no reason to change that."

A second Dome post quotes from a 2005 News and Record story:

In a profile that ran in the Greensboro News-Record on May 29, 2005, the Democratic Senate candidate said that she did not see the need for an amendment to the state constitution banning gay marriage:

Same-sex unions: "In my everyday life, it just doesn't come up. I think it's a very polarizing issue, and in North Carolina we have a law saying marriage is between a man and a woman. I don't think there's a need for a (state) constitutional amendment."

Of course, Hagan says that she opposes gay marriage.  One alert reader has pointed out a parallel between Hagan and John Edwards.  During their U.S. Senate campaigns in North Carolina, they both made an effort to portray themselves as being more conservative than they actually are.  Hagan is borrowing from Edwards' playbook.

In fact, Hagan had a liberal voting record in the state Senate.

On the issue of gay marriage, it is quite apparent that Kay Hagan-- just like Barack Obama-- wants judges to be able to write the law on the issue.  That is the only reasonable explanation for her having opposed a constitutional amendment at the state level.  The canard she has advanced-- that we already have a law on the matter-- is horribly disingenuous.  She knows, perhaps better than most of us, that the state judiciary can nullify our state law outlawing gay marriage in a flash.

She has wanted judges to have the opportunity to write the law on gay marriage; and to leave open the possibility that they will mandate it become legal.  She has been a leader of the state legislative majority in Raleigh that has refused to allow a vote on a constitutional amendment.

And we need to keep in mind the kind of judges she would vote to confirm in Washington; and the kind she would oppose.  The vote to confirm or reject judicial nominations is a very important responsibility in the US Senate.  It would be a mistake to leave that task in Hagan's hands.

Comments

[Roger Greene]

After the weddings they can hold receptions at segregated country clubs.

[Joe Guarino]

Astute point, Roger. You may have noticed that the News and Record reported on the country club issue today-- at the tail end of the Inside Scoop column, at the bottom of page B2.

Ms. Hagan had little reason to worry about this story getting played up and drumbeated. She is, after all, a liberal Democrat.

[Stormy]

You have to appreciate that the News-Record takes care of its own.

[Stormy]

The mention on B-2 is nothing new. It's the same political spin signifying nothing and not answering any pertinent questions. Hagan still hasn't said anything about how many times she went there and whether she saw the segregation. At a minimum, she tacitly went along with the discrimination and said nothing, which is what most rich liberals do.