The Dems: Out in (West) Hollywood

Over at Out in Hollywood, my colleague Greg Hernandez writes about the adoring, star-like treatment Hillary Clinton received in West Hollywood following last night's gay-themed debate. I don't get it.

How is it that gay activists can be so gaga about Clinton -- or, for that matter, the other top Democratic presidential contenders, Barack Obama and John Edwards -- when all three are on the record as opposing the single issue gay activists care about most -- same-sex marriage? If, as gay-marriage supporters claim, this is the paramount issue of civil rights, then how can they regard these candidates as even acceptable?

I can only guess at an explanation: They think the candidates are lying. Greg hints at this when he writes:

And, as expected, none came out in favor of gay marriage. Some came close but they were so careful. So careful that it seemed less clear after they answered why they opposed it except for the unstated obvious: too politically risky. Still, some of us thought it would have been a great opportunity to make that leap but it was not to be, not last night.

Even though the candidates have said, repeatedly, that they oppose gay marriage, Greg held out hope that last night they would change course. And even though they didn't, he remains hopeful that they still will. "Not last night," but alas, perhaps some night soon.

It's an entirely reasonable hope, given how the candidates do all they can to keep the possibility open. As Edwards put it last night: "All I can tell you is where I am today. I do not support same-sex marriage."

That's where I am today; but tomorrow, who knows? After all, it's hardly unheard of for politicians to say one thing on the campaign trail and to do another when in office. But even so, is this really how gay-marriage supporters want to elect a sympathetic president -- on a lie? And if they don't think a candidate has the courage to stand with them now, what makes them so confident that the officeholder will suddenly come through for them later?

The reason why the Democrats are so coy on this issue, as Greg observes, is plain: political risk. On the one hand, they don't want to alienate gay and lesbian supporters, but on the other, they don''t want to scare off the majority of Americans who remain (pardon the pun) wedded to the notion that the marital union is, and can only be, between members of the complementary sexes.

So they try to play it both ways. They say they oppose gay marriage, but leave just enough wiggle room to keep its supporters hopeful for a future reversal.

Which is to say, the major Democratic presidential candidates dangle the very real possibility that they're lying -- something we all should remember when we cast our votes.