Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Arnie on His Deeply Held Beliefs regarding Gay Marriage

Two things happen today: Arnie meets with gay leaders in his office, after he requested they come. Also, the gay marriage bill finally hits his desk, after being held up by a delaying tactic from the legislature, to give them opportunity to lobby Arnie.

Yesterday, the San Jose Mercury News interviewed Arnie on this and other topics. Here's the [original article] and a partial transcript. Of particular interest is the fact that
he can't remember if he's ever attended a gay wedding or committment ceremony. I suppose that's because he just doesn't pay attention to such things as gender -- he's a gender blind guy.


"Q: Let me change gears here for a moment, if you don't mind. I'm curious if you, Governor Schwarzenegger or private citizen Arnold Schwarzenegger, if you've have ever attended a gay marriage or a gay commitment ceremony -- a gay or lesbian marriage or commitment ceremony?

A: I can't remember.

Q: You've talked a lot about, you know, being deferential to the courts and to the people, but I'm curious what your personal views are on gay marriage. Are you personally troubled by it, as a father, as a Catholic? Does it bother you, or are you deferring to the wishes of the people, do you think?

A: You know, to me, I have never really felt that strong one way or another because to me, I don't, you know, I'm not personally hung up on the whole thing....But I try not to, as much as possible, not to get my own personal opinion in there. Because, I think that if you represent the people of California and the people of California voted on that issue, and overwhelmingly voted on that issue, and Proposition 22 won, I don't want to be the one that says, `Look, I decide right now your vote doesn't mean anything. And the money that you spent on that campaign was a waste of money and it's gone.' And I think it just shows you also, at the same time, how much out of touch the Legislature is with the people.

Q: But it (Proposition 22) was five years ago, right?

A: It doesn't matter. The only way can redo it -- Look, Proposition 13 was in 1978, does it mean that now we should go, the legislators should go, and re-do Proposition 13? What would you say if --

Q: Well polls show that opinions have changed on gay marriage --

A: You're absolutely correct. I believe that too. But then they have to go back to the people, like I do. The reason why I have to go with our budget reform back to the people is because it involves Prop 98. I cannot say, `That was in 1988 and people misunderstood it and now they think totally different.' No, I have to go back to the people to get my budget approved because it does have an effect on education. You know, it will stabilize education funding so it doesn't go up and down the way it is right now, but it will effect it. And so therefore, I think that it you want to change that, I have no objection to people going out and trying to change it, but they have to go back to the people. That's just the way it works. Thats the way the law is....

I have the utmost respect for gay people, for gay couples....In this particular case, I'm the governor and I've got to protect the people of California and I've got to protect the people of California's right that if they vote there should be no other power that should change it other than the courts....

Q: So then would you take some sort of pledge vowing not to use the gay marriage veto in --

A: No, I'm out of the pledge business....

Q: But you said you're not hung up on the issue, would you agree not to use the gay marriage issue for political advantage?

A: I will never use it. Did you see me saying one word at the Republican convention?

Q: No, but you know things could always change down the line...

A: No, no, no, no. There is no change. I don't want to set up one group of people against another group of people. No....That's not my style....

"

1 comment:

Unknown said...

Robin, everything you say here is an entirely reasonable interpretation of the known facts.

Here's an interesting fact. The California voter is now 50/50 on allowing gays to marry. That's a big switch from the 2/1 situation just two years ago. You kind of wonder, if the momentum is going in the other direction, and there is likely to be a ballot issue on this next year during the gubernatorial election that Arnie has declared for, which side would it be smart to be on?

Thank you for your generous upping to the 2-for-1 bet. Note that I concede that I had misinterpreted Arnie's delay in vetoing as an attempt at a conversion, when in fact it was due to a procedural block. Nonetheless, I still think this is a good bet -- we'll see in the next few days.