First he backtracks on his statement about the Constitutional Convention, which fine, perhaps his position on that was overstated. That doesn’t bother me as much even though I thought it was great when I thought he was going advocate it even with the concerns I had.
Then there’s the statement about gay couples with children:
“I don’t have any problem, I just don’t think it has to a marriage. I just don’t. I guess my feeling is marriage is an institution that was and has been recognized for generations as a contract between one male and one female. I think it should stay that way.
“I don’t have a problem with people that want to live together and raise a child and things like that. In fact, Grace Copley, who was my clerk for years, or my secretary when I was lieutenant governor and governor, she has a son who’s gay, and he and his friend have adopted children and are raising the children. And Grace is a very conservative religious woman. It was a very difficult thing for her to deal with when this became the situation. But they did. And she still is not someone who is supportive of gay marriage, but she’s certainly supportive of her children and grandchildren.
Since gay adoption was allowed in Iowa under his watch makes this statement even more problematic. I feel for kids who are in shelter care (I work with them full time). I do not believe that a gay adoption would be better, I just don’t. It’s confusing for kids. It is certainly not what was intended. Of course his former secretary is supportive of her children and grandchildren – it’s not their fault, but that isn’t the same thing as being supportive of the decision that allowed it in the first place.
Then there’s civil unions…
“Well, I don’t think people should be discriminated against. And you know, certainly I recognize the situation as far as the hospital and things like that. I don’t have a problem with that.”
There are living wills, power of attorney, and legal contracts that can remedy that. Again what is desired is not civil rights, but special rights. Perhaps if civil union contracts are opened up to various relationships (and I don’t mean sexual) for legal benefit then fine. I will concede that I’d rather have civil unions than gay marriage, but even then it should be something the Legislature and/or the people decide, not the courts.
While I don’t agree with Vander Plaats’ executive order idea I still want our Governor fighting, within his constitutional means, for traditional marriage. Governor Branstad again didn’t come across as one who will be a strong advocate.
It doesn’t help with a large part of the base who will need to be convinced if he is going to win the nomination and then the general election. This is exactly why Iowa Family PAC made it clear they weren’t going to endorse him.
He did say he’s reading blogs though… I wonder why?