Bill Clinton: “I Was Wrong About Gay Marriage”

Last night Anderson Cooper asked Bill Clinton

Do you now believe that gay people should have full rights to civil marriage nationwide?

And Clinton responded:

I do

Then the former president backpedaled a bit as seen above, and said it should be a state’s right to decide.

I think that well, let me get back to the last point, the last word. I believe that historically for 200 some years, marriage has been a question left to the states and religious institutions. I still think that’s where it belongs. That is, I was against a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage nationwide and I still think the American people should be able to play this out in debates.

And while he doesn’t go so far as to say same-sex marriage should be recognized by the federal government, he does admit he was wrong to oppose civil marriage equality and wrong to be hung up on a word:

Me, Bill Clinton, I am no longer opposed to that [gay marriage]. I think if people want to make commitments that last a lifetime, they ought to be able to do it…

So, I said — you know, I — I realized that I was, you know, over 60 years old. I grew up in a different time. And I was hung up about the word. And I had all these gay friends. I had all these gay couple friends. And I was hung up about it.

And I decided I was wrong. That if — that our society has an interest in coherence and strength and commitment and mutually reinforcing loyalties. and if, gay couples want to call their union marriage and a state agrees — and several have now — or a religious body will sanction it, I don’t think the state should be able to stop religious bodies from sanctioning it. I don’t think the rest of us should get in the way of that. I think it’s a good thing, not a bad thing.

Thank you, Lane Hudson, for giving marriage equality a shout out at Netroots Nation during President Clinton’s speech and causing a shift in the night’s rhetoric, and I think a shift in Clinton’s thinking—and his willingness to speak about that shift.

35 Responses to "Bill Clinton: “I Was Wrong About Gay Marriage”"
Teddy Partridge | Saturday September 26, 2009 11:23 am 1

See how easy that was, elected Democrats? Just follow the words the way the Big Dog said them:

“I was wrong about gay marriage.”

It’s not a flip-flop, it is an evolution. In our party, evolution is permitted. And we welcome your conversion to the fold. Just say it:

“I think if people want to make commitments that last a lifetime, they ought to be able to do it.”


perris | Saturday September 26, 2009 01:37 pm 2

I personally believe NO government agency should be involved in marriage, the concept was originally thought up to prevent black from marrying white, as a deviding force and that’s what it’s being used for today

imho, the state should award partnership certificates and the person’s specific relious afiliation can say whatecer they want to say about marriage for their specific following


mlmc | Saturday September 26, 2009 01:46 pm 3

Now Bill needs to talk with his BFF Obama and get rid of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and the stupid protection of marriage law. Bill should ask Obama to correct Bill’s mistakes, not extend them.


bmull | Saturday September 26, 2009 01:49 pm 4

So now what are you going to do about it???


newtonusr | Saturday September 26, 2009 01:49 pm 5

This is and has always been an equal protection argument.
The 14th amendment, Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Allowing an institution where so many rights are at play to be dictated by the morays of a particular state is still terribly discriminatory.

This is the cowardly courts responsibility. Either you are enjoined from prohibiting equal protection, or you are not.


eCAHNomics | Saturday September 26, 2009 01:52 pm 6

I’m a couple of years older than Clinton and I got used to the concept of gay marriage about as soon as I recognized that’s what they wanted. Then it becomes an issue of civil rights. WTF took Clinton so long?


newtonusr | Saturday September 26, 2009 01:56 pm 7
In response to eCAHNomics @ 6

States rights are a born-and-bred part of the South. I can see where he would cling to it for too long.


Bluetoe2 | Saturday September 26, 2009 01:56 pm 8

Fuck Bill Clinton. These A hole politicians always see the light after their out of office. Obama will likely say he was wrong about not pushing for a global climate treaty when he’s out of office. U.S. politicians are cowards and corrupt.


eCAHNomics | Saturday September 26, 2009 01:59 pm 9
In response to Bluetoe2 @ 8

Don’t forget the generals who do the same thing. Only after they retire do we get the truth out of them, and even then, it’s just a precious few.


tw3k | Saturday September 26, 2009 02:00 pm 10

lolClinton… Has that language been cannonized yet? lol

srrly tho, them two are steadfast state rightwrtrs. Whats the dhilly, yo.


dakine01 | Saturday September 26, 2009 02:03 pm 11

Book Salon up at the Mothership with Nomi Prinz’s It Takes a Pillage hosted by Max Wolff


demi | Saturday September 26, 2009 03:09 pm 12
In response to newtonusr @ 7

Well, it just goes to show ya, people think want they want to. You seem to be first in the line to tell people who’s right and wrong. And, you’re not even from the South. Hi. haven’t seen you for a while. Hope all is well with you.


Blub | Saturday September 26, 2009 03:16 pm 13

here I have to raise a voice to caution. Historically, regulation of marriage and other familiar practices has, in substantial measure been left to the states, except where the Federal courts have to step to protect Constitutional rights (as with abortion). Trust me, you don’t want Congress legislating these things. I would hate to have my rights in marriage or my rights to marry decided by Dixiecrats from some far foreign land of which we know little. If we allow the Feds to push their way into areas customarily reserved for state legislation, every fundie mullah will be camped put in WDC lobbying to federalize everything from book burnings, to adultery, to the rights out of wedlock children. Heck.. they try to sneak this stuff into legislation as it is. Federal legislation on marriage rights, one way or another, is a long, slippery slope. If the Supremes want to rule for gay marriage, I’m all for it, but Congress needs to stay out of this one.


Cellar47 | Saturday September 26, 2009 03:17 pm 14
In response to perris @ 2

Sorry, but Marriage is a contract between individuals recognized by the state.

PERIOD!

It can be performed by priests, rabbis, ministers, etc. But it can also be perfomed by a dul accreditied Elvis impersonator in Las Vegas.

This whole “The government should get out of the marriage business” meme is a LIE promulgated by those folks who demand you believe in a Big Invisible Bi-Polar Daddy Who Lives in The Sky.

How nice of Big Dog to say he was wrong — after instituting DOMA and ruining thousands of lives!

Now he thinks it’s OK. Great news for Anderson Cooper. Now if he wants to marry his lover of 8 years (and counting) Julio Ceasar Recio, he can go right to Massachusetts and do so. Of course that license won’e mean shot anywhere else but what do you expect when you aren’t heterosexual?


demi | Saturday September 26, 2009 03:39 pm 15

You’re just too much, Cellar. I still like my gay friends, tho.


newtonusr | Saturday September 26, 2009 03:45 pm 16
In response to demi @ 12

Actually I think Bubba was just plain wrong and should have realized it back in the day. And while I am not from the South, one of my parents grew up in northern Mississippi, a place which I have visited a few times, and about which I am privileged to know a few things.

And Demi:

You seem to be first in the line to tell people who’s right and wrong.

Have you fallen down and hit your head on something really hard? Think ‘ice pack.’


demi | Saturday September 26, 2009 03:47 pm 17
In response to newtonusr @ 16

You may know a few things. Regarding me falling down, no I have not. Thanks, I don’t need the ice pack.


perris | Saturday September 26, 2009 04:24 pm 18
In response to Cellar47 @ 14

I guess you missed my point;

it doesn’t need to be issued by the state, nor should it, marriage has always been here but the government getting involved is a recent development based on bigotry and by bigots

George Washington’s marriage was not sanctioned by the government nor should it have been.

allowing a government agency to “award a marriage” is a bizarre position for progressives to claim, allowing that government agency the power to “recognize marriage” is equally bizarre.

there is absolutely no reason any government agency, local or general, should have any say what so ever over who can and who cannot marry

PERIOD

government involvement in marriage was conceived by bigots, for bigots and the purpose is obviously still served

we NEED to remove that power of bigotry the government has

that’s my position, I understand yours and we disagree…entirely


perris | Saturday September 26, 2009 04:41 pm 19
In response to perris @ 18

interesting, I just did a google search on the concept and alan gershowitze aggrees, here’s something interesting, even a href=”http://www.slate.com/id/2085127/”>slate magazine suggests the same

there are even clergy who make the very same suggestion

it’s a great idea, it gets government out of our bedroom, religion out of our choice, the law on our side, helps prevent bigots from keeping us from marrying whoever the hell we want to marry


Cellar47 | Saturday September 26, 2009 04:53 pm 20
In response to perris @ 18

No it DOES need to be issued by the state. How else do you suppose a legal document applicable to THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is suppsoed to operate?

HUNH?

DOMA fucking KILLED same-sex marriage. Straights who marray can inherit from each other automatically. They can get each other’s Social Security when the party of the second part dies. Why? Because heterosexual marriage is recognized nationwide. Yes we’ve got a couple of states now, but the same-sex marriages they perform DON’T MEAN SHIT when compared to what breeders get.

AND I’M SO FUCKING TIRED of hearing about “well of course they should be able to visit one another in the hospital.”

Isn’t that precious?

THE 38 YEARS MY LOVER AND I HAVE BEEN TOGETHER DID NOT UNFOLD IN A FUCKING HOSPITAL !!!!!!


Cellar47 | Saturday September 26, 2009 04:54 pm 21

Dershowitz, as usual, is full of shit.


zeabow | Saturday September 26, 2009 05:29 pm 22

When I could have done something about it, I didn’t, but now that I can’t, I would if I could.

bill clinton


NCGal | Saturday September 26, 2009 05:36 pm 23

I give Bill Clinton slack on this issue & appreciate his saying he was wrong. When he was president, the country’s political atmosphere was tremendously different than it is now. Talk radio was king, internet was still very young, & there was this self-righteous moralistic attitude that was prevalent in politics. Times have changed, in so many ways.


SomeGuy | Saturday September 26, 2009 05:45 pm 24

It is good for him to say he has changed his mind and why. He may lead some other people in his generation to reconsider. He should go further and say he was wrong to sign DOMA. He was not just another man with his own personal views. DOMA is still on the books, and President Clinton still owns that.


Cellar47 | Saturday September 26, 2009 06:20 pm 25

A great many days late and untold dollars short.


zeabow | Saturday September 26, 2009 07:57 pm 26
In response to zeabow @ 22

But I feel you.

bill clinton


zeabow | Saturday September 26, 2009 08:01 pm 27
In response to zeabow @ 26

pause … bite lower lip

to self: that ought to do it, these dumbass limousine liberals are so fucking stupid, they fall for this silly shit every time.

bill clinton


Cellar47 | Saturday September 26, 2009 08:02 pm 28

Big Dog was always adept at copping a feel.


zeabow | Saturday September 26, 2009 08:02 pm 29

oh shit, I forgot to bite my lower lip … bite it, now look at the audience. yeah that oughta do it.

bill clinton


zeabow | Saturday September 26, 2009 08:03 pm 30

oh shit o forgot to bite my lower lip … bite it, now make eye contact with the audience. yeah, that oughta do it …

bill clinton


upstateNYerMdwst | Saturday September 26, 2009 08:23 pm 31

He DID NOT go far enough unfortunately. He said that “he personally” believes in marriage equality, but I did not hear him DEMAND that the Dems eliminate DOMA, DADT, and pass ENDA. True, this wouldn’t have an impact on individual States, but Clinton needs to own DOMA and say he screwed up big time and demand a repeal of it. The States shall follow, one by one… I am confident of this. Why? Because we younger folk are overwhelmingly in favor of marrige equality, and guess who’s going to be running all of the States in 10-20 years!


Millineryman | Saturday September 26, 2009 09:00 pm 32

I could care less what Bill Clinton has to say. He couldn’t be man enough to admit that he had an affair, and was stupid enought to give the Republicans the rope they almost hanged him with. I could careless about the infamous cause of the stained dress but when you have an independent prosecutor nipping at your heals, and you something that you lie about under oath, you’re an idiot.

Thanks Lane, and honestly I’m tired of excuses. He could’ve vetoed DOMA and had the Senate over ride him.


TexasReader | Sunday September 27, 2009 04:46 am 33

Former Presidents always say what they should have done because they did not have the political chutzpah to do it while in office. It is called trying to rehabilitate your Presidency. Jimmy Carter leads the pack at trying to do that. Note to Jimmy Carter, when you are in a hole stop digging.

Nixon was a crook so he did not care to rehabilitate his Presidency.


Clavis | Sunday September 27, 2009 06:26 am 34
In response to Cellar47 @ 20

What makes a piece of paper issued from the government of a state any less abstract or symbolic or bureaucratic or ephemeral than a piece of paper issued from the federal government.

The whole concept of states being a magical, all-wise level of government (as opposed to the fed) is idiotic. We’re in the 21st century. We don’t need to organize our government to deal with handwritten correspondence taking weeks to move from city to city and local delegates being unable to communicate with constituents and staff while they’re in the capital. I have no problem with the concept of successive levels of localization, but too many arguments become “LET THE STATE DECIDE!”

Really? Then maybe we need to re-apportion state populations, or divide some states up. Because I don’t see the citizens of California being served by their wise state government, for example.

The right to have your marriage recognized as such in any state is a constitutional right if ANY marriage recognition is. People with straight marriage certificates issued in Florida don’t have to panic if they’re in a car accident just over the Alabama border because Alabama hospitals might not recognize their shared medical or end-of-life-decision rights.

To suggest that gay married couples need to live in fear of geography is insane and manifestly unequal.


Cellar47 | Sunday September 27, 2009 06:41 am 35

There’s nothign abstract about it at all. Married breeders have THOUSANDS of rights that are denied me and my lover of 38 years.

There’s nothing “magical” involved. It’s quite concrete, as a moments reflection (which you obviously don’t wish to take) would make plain. “Let the State deciode” would be fine if the same-ses marriages that take place in Massachusetts were reconized in California.

WHAT DO YOU NEED? FLASH CARDS?

“The right to have your marriage recognized as such in any state is a constitutional right if ANY marriage recognition is.”

It should be. But DOMA trumps that. And it will remian trumped until DOMA is repealed.

“To suggest that gay married couples need to live in fear of geography is insane and manifestly unequal.”

WELCOME TO THE INSANE AND MANIFESTLY UNEQUAL WORLD LGBT TAXPAYERS LIVE IN!

Why not try thinking about walking a mile in my shoes? And in preparation for doing so READ THIS!


Sorry but the comments are closed on this post

Get the Most out of FDL

Become a Member today

Local activism projects

Exclusive online chats

Independent media

Close