- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
After Initially Skirting Queries about Morality of Homosexuality, Clinton and Obama Offer Clarifications
March 15, 2007 5:18 PM
ABC News' Teddy Davis, Jonathan Greenberger, and Eloise Harper Report: Two leading Democratic presidential candidates -- Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.. -- offered statements Thursday maintaining that they do not think homosexuality is immoral. The Clinton and Obama clarifications came one day after the two senators skirted separate queries from journalists on the morality of homosexuality in the wake of comments from Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, calling homosexual acts immoral.
"Well I've heard from a number of my friends and I've certainly clarified with them any misunderstanding that anyone had, because I disagree with General Pace completely. I do not think homosexuality is immoral," Clinton told Bloomberg News Thursday.
Clinton framed her Thursday comments to Bloomberg News as a clarification of a Wednesday "misunderstanding," of her remarks in an interview with ABC News. During that interview, she was asked about Pace's comments several times and did not defend homosexuality’s morality, preferring instead to focus strictly on her opposition on the U.S. military's "Don’t Ask, Don't Tell" policy.
In her Wednesday interview with ABC News' Jake Tapper, Clinton said: "Well, I’m going to leave that to others to conclude" when asked if homosexuality is "immoral."
Obama's Thursday clarification came in a written statement issued from his press secretary Bill Burton.
". . . I do not agree with General Pace that homosexuality is immoral," Obama said in his written statement. "Attempts to divide people like this have consumed too much of our politics over the past six years."
Obama's Thursday statement comes one day after he seemed to skirt questions about the morality of homosexuality from Newsday.
As he was leaving the Hyatt Regency hotel in Washington, D.C., Obama was asked several times by a Newsday reporter if he thought homosexuality was "immoral."
Obama avoided answering the question about the morality of homosexuality and spoke instead about the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, underscoring his support for gays and lesbians serving openly in the U.S. military. He did take issue with Pace’s decision to venture beyond military affairs in his interview with the Chicago Tribune’s editorial board.
"I think traditionally the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman has restricted his public comments to military matters," Obama said Wednesday. "That’s probably a good tradition to follow."
Asked on Wednesday to comment on Pace’s characterization of homosexuality as "immoral," Obama said: "I think that the question here is if someone is willing to sacrifice for their country they should be able to."
The Thursday clarifications from Clinton and Obama came after members of their staff came under pressure from a leading advocate for gay rights.
"I spent the whole morning talking with these campaigns and telling them that they needed to issue a clear, unequivocal answer to this question," Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign told ABC News. "And as you can see, they’ve done that."
March 15, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (20)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Congrats...its about time to see some bigotry of the GOP replaced by caring Democrats.
Can Obama say anything else or can all he say is a recording of how bad politics have been....hasn't he been there for the past 2 years too??
Posted by: Ryan | Mar 15, 2007 5:30:44 PM
What is the big deal about if you think homosexuality is immoral. You have the right to believe that way. The mark of a good politian would be to believe on thing (having the courage of your convictions) and not discriminate. I am just sick of so many people who say that people who think homosexuality is immoral, sick, and a sin saying you are gay bashing. I'm not, I jsut don't believe it is right.
Posted by: earnest | Mar 15, 2007 6:08:14 PM
Senator Hillary Clinton,
Was your husband's activities with Monica "immoral"?
Senator Obama Barak,
What do you say?
Please give your clear, unequivocal answers to the question.
Are only heterosexual acts potentially "immoral"? Does gay pride mean that no homosexual act is immoral? Where's the equality?
Is sex with children moral? Sex with animals? Sex with anyone and everyone, anytime and all the time?
Teachers with students?
Common candidates, speak out! Clarify your positions. Define what "morality" means in today's society. Is anything "immoral"? If so, what?
Posted by: Jody | Mar 15, 2007 6:39:10 PM
There has been a dramatic unleashing of immoral behavior, plunging from sanctity to depravity almost completely unnoticed. We have pedophiles everywhere, teachers bedding students barely out of puberty, kids who haven't yet figured out that morality is under attack, and gays who want to get married, raise kids and be legit. We have politicians caving into popular demand. Today it's the homosexuals who practice unprotected sex to a disco beat in private clubs right in front of our noses. But thank God we have one brave general who's not afraid to say it's immoral.
Posted by: Helen L. | Mar 15, 2007 7:29:58 PM
Isn't it funny how Democrats can never give a straight answer until they are put under a lot of "pressure"? Maybe they aren't so dogmatic about their beliefs.
Posted by: Jonathan | Mar 15, 2007 8:05:11 PM
The world is dying because of climate change, people are starving to death every day and people are worried about this?!?
Posted by: David | Mar 15, 2007 8:05:50 PM
that just gos to show you what gutless wonders will do not to lose a vote but I think this will back fire on both the gutless wonders.
Posted by: donald | Mar 15, 2007 9:08:04 PM
Whether or not one agrees with his opinion, at least Pace can be credited for expressing his honest feelings. With Clinton, we have the same checking with her advisors (e.g. putting her finger up in the air to test which way the wind is blowing) before she can find her true feelings. Barak is too new for one to determine if this is what you will get with him, but it's not a good start. Are we all too stupid to not recognize the disaster that faces us with either of these two? That is, along with the present GOP candidates. I wait for Gingrich or Fred Thompson to run so that we can at least hear some heartfelt discourse that you know they believe in.
Posted by: Paul Comi | Mar 15, 2007 9:49:00 PM
Of course, both Obama and Clinton played cute politics. They both said that homosexuality is not immoral. This avoids the issue, since General Pace did not say that homosexuality is immoral. He said that homosexual acts are immoral. There is a vast difference between the two. Homosexuality cannot be immoral, because it is a condition or status.
The two politicians have still not answered the question as to whether they believe that homosexual acts are immoral.
Posted by: SR | Mar 16, 2007 12:33:52 AM
SR, the homosexual "Acts" is just as immoral as the heterosexual "Acts" if one determines the acts is immoral since physically, they are all the same. So is mentally. It's an expression of love and attraction between two individuals. If you think the "Acts" is immoral because no offsprings is reproduced, then both homosexuals and heterosexuals who can't reproduce are both immoral based on your reasoning.
Posted by: Linh Nguyen | Mar 16, 2007 10:22:10 AM
There are so many more important issues in this world to worry about other than homosexuality. Innocent soldiers are dying every day. I think that is more important than homosexuals having unprotected sex to the disco beat, which for the record, I, as a gay American have never done.
Posted by: john | Mar 16, 2007 11:23:29 AM
This country is founded on principles taught in the Bible. No one should be asking anyone to define if homosexuality is immoral because it is so clear in the Word that God hate homosexual acts, not the person, the act. Churches, politicians or anyone that condones acts of homosexuality and happen to call themselves christians are simply hypocrits and need to come back to a right relationship with God.
Posted by: Odie Langley, Jr. | Mar 16, 2007 11:44:24 AM
As a homosexual it is very strange and uncomfortable to hear people talk about homosexuality the way they sometimes do. I was raised in a christian church, I absolutely believe in God and in Jesus, and as far as whether or not my orientation is "immoral" is between me and God. As a contributing citizen I deserve the rights afforded to other Americans. I deserve to serve in the military without living in fear, in shadows, or having to live without intimacy with another person. Most homosexuals I've known in my life, and I've known plenty, are not interested in broadcasting their sexuality any more that they want to feel like it needs to be secret. There is so much fear surrounding these issues. The "don't ask,don't tell" policy is a slap in the face to any gay person that has ever served in our military, myself included.
Under this policy gay service men and women can serve, fight, and die for equal rights for everyone in this great country without being afforded the same liberties.
Posted by: Jennifer | Mar 16, 2007 1:02:28 PM
Odie, This country is NOT "based" on the bible. None of the writings of the Founders or the Framers indicated that religion had a significant influence on the formation of the USA, and mention of religion is excluded from the Constitution except in the negative. The Declaration includes one mention of Divine Providence. Hardly a ringing endorsement for your assertion that by implication the US should be an anti-homosexual (acts) State.
And I have always found the "hate the sin, not the sinner" to be disingenuous, especially when YOU get to define the sin. "It's OK to be homosexual as long as you don't DO anything about it, because it's a SIN." Please.
You think homosexual "acts" are a sin? I think you just think they have a high "ick" factor. Get over it, it's none of your business.
And no, homsexual acts are not a sin. "Sin lies only in hurting other people unnecessarily. All other 'sins' are invented nonsense." - Robert A. Heinlein
Posted by: GalapagosPete | Mar 16, 2007 2:01:11 PM
Oh geez. Why do these discussions always seem to drag in pedophiles, animals and such? And then the disco beat right under our noses comment? I feel like I'm in a really bad outtake from the movie Big Business ... "thieves, muggers, white slavers, politicians ... it's a pistol!" If you are not gay, then you really don't understand what it is like to be gay. Admit that talk about something that you actually might understand ... like best buys QVC or tips on decorating your trailer.
Posted by: R. Ratliff | Mar 16, 2007 5:13:44 PM
No one is suffering from global warming. The number of people starving to death is going down, thankfully. In the States, poor people are more likely to eat too much than not enough! But from broken marriages and wild living, many children suffer. So why would people say this is not important? There is virtually nothing MORE important!
Posted by: Chris Jones | Mar 16, 2007 6:17:42 PM
There many things that irritate & hurt others. As to the gay life style, there are many things that affront people of faith, like the evil we see in the activities in America and around the world.
True, no one is perfect, but forgivenes brings healings. We have lying Politicians on both sides of the fence, who lie cheat etc.
As to the Founding Fathers and there feeling on the Bible, why was the Main text book, for over 300 years the Bible, used in the Public School system if 'Church a State seperation' were true? That statement is not in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.
The ID designer of all life in The Biblical text explains the situation on homosexual acts. What we say is immaterial.
It appears that something better exists, the Heterosexual the mutual affections, which brings an extention of their heterosexual companion ship to bring harmony in their lives, producing a family through a Love relationship. Why is the gay relation ship wrong?
Check out Romans 1:28-32
Posted by: Fred | Mar 16, 2007 11:02:43 PM
Thats exactly why our nation is falling apart now! Because no man will lay a solid foundation to be built upon. Wake up America and stop shunning away from the truth. Perversion is running rampant and everybody seems to become PASSIVISTS about the whole issue! When is everybody going to see, that a nation divided against itself WILL NOT STAND!!!
Posted by: TJ | Mar 17, 2007 12:07:16 AM
Honestly folks, people have sex with one another all the time, in all sorts of positions, in all kinds of different places. It happens. When it comes down to it,I don't think there's much that could stop that, and I don't think politicians should be elected based on the amount of concern they have about our sex lives. I do think partners should take responsibility for their actions; make sure it's okay with eachother to do what you're doing, make sure no one gets pregnant if they aren't trying to, etc., but when it becomes a NATIONAL concern who I'm having (agreeable)sex with, I'm really not interested in voting for any candidate, Republican, Democrat, or other.
Posted by: Kyla | Mar 17, 2007 8:41:33 PM
The issue is: is homosexuality immoral? The answers is: no. Nothing is immoral unless it hurts someone unnecessarily. This is true no matter what your imaginary sky-friend says, or how icky you think it is.
Posted by: GalapagosPete | Mar 18, 2007 2:18:27 PM
Post a comment



