(with reporting from Justin Miller)
Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, Jr. (R) stunned his state when his spokesperson announced the governor's support for civil unions. 70 percent of Utahns oppose civil unions, but their objections
won't count against Huntsman who said he won't run for a third term as governor
- but they could weigh heavily on a 2012 White House run.
Should
he run for president, Huntsman would take heat, just as ex-Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney The
Republican base, by and large, is suspicious of candidates who support any legal recognition of same-sex couples. A large plurality -- maybe a
majority -- of early Republican primary voters are viscerally
uncomfortable with homosexuality and view it as a threat.
Mr. Romney was
blasted as a false convert to the "pro-marriage" side for appearing to switch
his position from favoring civil unions to opposing them. Romney said he
supported neither arrangement for gays but preferred civil unions if he had to
choose; he was pushed into weighing in on the issue because of his state's Supreme Court legalized gay marriage during his term.
Huntsman might have it worse: he is choosing to take a position on the issue without being pressured to. "Pro family" groups have accused him of betraying conservatives by embracing civil unions after campaigning against them in
2004 when he ran for governor and said he supported Utah's constitutional
amendment outlawing unions and marriage for gays. Huntsman hasn't yet explained his mind-change in detail.
The bill Huntsman endorsed has little chance of
passing the conservative Utah legislature.
Beyond civil unions, Huntsman also
threw his support behind a bill to allow two unmarried, co-habiting adults to
sign a "joint-support declaration" to gain inheritance rights and
medical-decision making decisions for one another, as well as a bill to outlaw
employment and housing discrimination for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender
people.
I look forward to the day when the word "moderate" is no longer applied to someone who wants to control the reproductive freedom of women and eliminate the presumption of privacy in the Constitution.
Just sayin...
Jon Huntsman has cut taxes, positioned Utah to benefit from the increased utilization of alternative fuels and renewable energy and has aggressively marketed the state as a business friendly destination. But alas he might not hate gays enough to be Presidential timber. I sincerely hope he does run for President. Then we'll be able to tell whether Republicans have any remaining lineage to the party of Barry Goldwater or have fully become the party of Tony Perkins.
Come on. Let think about this. The intellectual view, that will previal over time and win out is that homosexuality and even gender identity are hard-wired innocently into the fetal brain just like handedness and other biological traits (not genetic, per se). So, what are we gonna do? We are going to accept them like any group of society with traits that are new to us and not associated with any pathological behavior. That is the intellectual take on orientation, and identity.
The American Psychiatric Ass'n, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychological Ass'n, and American Psychoanalytic Ass'n confirm that sexual orientation is natural, biologically induced, morally neutral, immutable, neither contagious nor learned, and has no relation to an individuals ability to form deep and lasting relationships, to parent children, to work, or to contribute to society. They endorsed civil marriage for same sex couples because marriage strengthens the mental and physical health and the longevity of couples, and provides greater legal and financial security for children, parents, and seniors.
The American Psychiatric Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychological Association, and American Psychoanalytic Association endorsed same-sex civil marriage because research confirms that it’s good for children, parents, and seniors.
Make your opinion from personal beliefs or from facts: The American Psychiatric Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, and American Psychological Association all endorsed same-sex civil marriage confirming benefits for children, parents, and seniors.
On what will you base your opinion?
Dr. O'Hanlan,
How do I know that what you have described as facts are real? In case you don't know, the American Library Association is pushing for information literacy throughout the United States because there is a life-cycle to information that can become obsolete over time. “Out of the super-abundance of available information, people need to be able to obtain specific information to meet a wide range of personal and business needs. The need for applicable information is largely driven by the desire for personal growth and advancement or by the rapidly changing social, political, and economic environments of American society. What is true today is often outdated tomorrow. A good job today may be obsolete next year. To promote economic independence and quality of existence, there is a lifelong need for being informed and up-to-date” (Presidential Committee on Information Literacy: Final Report, 1989).
Is it possible that the organizations you mentioned were simply making a political statement that represents the consensous of those who contribute financially to the organizations you mentioned in your comment? Is it possible that the information offered in your post could be outdated or may be outdated in the future based upon the criterium of the American Library Association?
Reference:
Presidential committee on information literacy: final report. (1989), [Abstract]. Retrieved February 28, 2009 from http://news.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/publications/whitepapers/presidential.cfm
Sincerely,
A Doctoral Student
Thank you, Dr. Kate O'Hanlan for taking the time to write. It never ceases to amaze me that this STILL needs to be explained, and I hope those who do not really know the information contained in your posting will take an honest look at how their own opinions on this matter were formulated, and what in their lives has re-enforced the misinformation.
Interesting perspective. Strategically, Huntsman's well-served by staking out a more forward-looking position on this issue while remaining staunchly conservative on other topics: it distinguishes him from the other candidates (similar to how Huckabee distinguishes himself with economic populism). Also a chunk of the most rabidly anti-gay Republicans are also anti-LDS, and he wasn't going to be getting their votes anyhow. Of course if the Republican party continues to choose a hate-based approach here, it means he has no chance for the nomination ... but that scenario dooms the Republicans to failure in 2012, so he's better off anyhow. So if he's doing this to position himself for 2012, my initial reaction is "well done!"
As a Utah citizen, I find it interesting that Governor Huntsman could jump in the race for the presidency in 2012. With two Mormons vying for the presidency with lots of money, it should be quite a show for the media and political watchers every where. Both candidates would likely have contrasting points of view on various issues facing the American public. With contrasting points of view, hopefully, the Mormon question will become irrelevent and confusing.
We would have two candidates who could personally fund their own campaigns (Governor Romney as a CEO at Bain & Co. and Governor Huntsman as a President of Huntsman Chemical under billionaire father Jon Huntsman Sr., both have experience as governors, Governor Huntsman also having diplomatic experience as a former United States Ambassador to Singapore, and the management of a state that has had a surplus for the last 35 years in a row.
From insiders at a recent rally in Provo, Utah, I leared that Governor Huntsman does have national political interests and is positioning himself for federal office. Is it possible that Huntsman is garnering support for a political campaign? I believe he is positioning himself right now for a major political move.
Kate O'Hanlan, MD
Those organizations lie in order to acquire the funding and social support they need to justify their existence. I have several friends who are gay. ALL but one has said that they were molested at an early age by a same sex adult in charge of their care. (The one that didn't, would not talk about how he became and was not out at the time.) I know two who have "recovered" (for lack of a better word) from that lifestyle and are choosing heterosexual lifestyles, with legal spouses and born children.) You and the rest have no claim on the truth of people's lives. And the choice remains as we grow that we can choose our own path, whether the path of least resistance or that of the higher road. What society has done is allow free people who choose homosexuality to define same sex preferences as a "right" rather than a choice. All have the freedom to choose, but the consequences are not always what is desired. But the fact remains that this is a moral issue. No, your industry does not deal with moral issues and would hope that everyone else would forget morality as a real choice and live by the 'relativism' of life, that is, that morality is relative to what each one defines by their experiences... Morality is them marginalized and there is no rule of law... WE see the fruits of this kind of thinking now running the White House. We will feel the pinch and heat of such 'relative' moral choices made there very soon.
Take it to the end, dear dr. and see where it gets you.