SFist: In His Own Words: Gavin Newsom On Same-Sex Marriage

bluecanary

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:45:34 -0800

To be fair, I would venture a guess that Kimberly did a little "walking away" herself. You can't keep a wife if the wife doesn't want you anymore.

Brock Keeling

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 13:59:39 -0800

Oh please.

cablecarsam

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 13:30:26 -0800

Looks like ol Gav does not take marriage seriously, so why listen to him. Took a vow til death do us part, for better or worse... and then walked away and now he is about to do it again so soon? Marriage IS until death do us part and it is a bond between a man and a woman. Don't mess kids up anymore than they are with two mothers or two fathers. Partnerships for Gay couples, don't CALL it marriage.

cablecarsam

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 13:30:08 -0800

bluecanary

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 12:08:57 -0800

Unfortunately, RobinSF, the type of people who are against gay marriage (and probably interracial marriage), have a LOT of children. Be fruitful and multiply and all that malarkey.

suckafree

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 11:36:49 -0800

speaking of old people, it was their racist ways that won hillary texas last night. so sad. i fear this is the end of the democratic party. the superdelagates will now have to decide which nominee will take the ticket, infuriating the regular voters. i bet a lot of the independents that went for obama will go for mccain as a result if hillary gets the nod after arguing in court that florida and michigan should count now. net it all out, the rebublicans will get the white house again thanks to a bunch of red neck racists that do not want a black man in the whitehouse and thanks to hillary' negative campaign attacks. way to go womyn!

RobInSF

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:52:57 -0800

Interracial marriage was still illegal in 13 states until 1967. Luckily, the old people eventually die and take their outdated idea(l)s with them to their graves. Unfortunately, some of them have children.

bluecanary

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:14:36 -0800

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't there already several cases re gay marriage already wending their way through the court system when Gavin pulled this stunt? Seems to me the non-showboating thing to do would have been to let the already existing cases be decided, rather than make a grandstanding move that ultimately benefited no one, and in fact hampered the movement (see all the states that immediately passed laws banning gay marriage in response to Gavin's publicity stunt, and yes, brought out the anti-gay bigots in droves to vote for Bush). If I'm wrong and it was Gavin that started it all, then feel free to correct me.

The Angry Young Man

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:00:41 -0800

Bluecanary, you don't actually think Newsom wrote that himself, do you?

The Angry Young Man

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:00:26 -0800

Bluecanary, you don't actually think Newsom wrote that himself, do you?

rroseselavy

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 09:33:59 -0800

bluecanary, I take back all of the terrible things I've been saying about you. And March 4 was National Grammar Day!

rageahol

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 08:46:18 -0800

way to go, gavster. your shameless pandering has paid off in at least one respect. you hear that, theyre talking about putting you in the HISTORY BOOKS!!!1!!1!!1one now how about fixing MUNI, or solving some homicides, or doing anything substantial. it is my opinion that supporting gay marriage in this way had absolutely zero political risk to a mayor of this city. ergo, he gets no credit for it. it is a civil rights issue, but your "support" doesnt count if you're not putting your neck on the line for it.

bluecanary

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 20:39:51 -0800

Because "more than" is correct. "Over" is not. That's what they taught me in journalism school, anyway.

periqueblend

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 18:44:10 -0800

Because over is a term indicating many things, including relative height, but not a numerical distinction. I do agree that this is a civil rights issue.

RobInSF

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 17:45:14 -0800

Glad Gavin is resting on his laurels and using his stump speech from 2004 about gay rights. (BTW great timing to help GWB get re-elected - nicely done.) It would be really nice to see him get on that second issue on his "to do" list.

OrangeDrink

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 17:03:13 -0800

Why do you like "more than" so much more than "over," Bluecanary?

daithi

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:42:11 -0800

Fingers crossed that the Court rules the right way.

suckafree

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:36:33 -0800

which candidate supported gay marriage? i didn't think any of them i was kinda disappointed that gav supported hillary as well but she'll be out of the race in the morning so it won't matter

bluecanary

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:32:10 -0800

I agree Pancake, but to be fair, at least he's not endorsing someone who brought "pray the gay away" ministers with them on the campaign trail.

bluecanary

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:30:59 -0800

He said "more than 4,000" rather than "over 4,000." This instantly elevates him in my eyes. Oh yeah, and I agree with what he wrote as well.

pancakebreakfast

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:28:00 -0800

And yet he's behind the candidate (Clinton) who doesn't support a full repeal of DOMA. Way to stand up for principle, Gavin!

KatyG

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:27:50 -0800

The one good thing Plastic Man has done.

bob loblaw

Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:21:04 -0800

i'm not always the biggest fan of newsom, but what he has accomplished for lgbt rights can not be overestimated. granted, one might argue that he hasn't done much since, it was a media ploy or whatever, but when the gay marriage section in history books is written, it will certainly include a piece about san francisco in 2004 and the courageous step that mayor newsom took. i'm proud of my city and i hope, in three months, to be just as proud of my state.