Insofar as John Kerry's position on anything can be discerned, it appears that he is basically pro-gay rights and, I think, supports civil unions. But, civil unions are somewhat amorphous legal entities, whereas marriage is not. So, if Kerry is a gay rights man, why won't he stand up and advocate the right for homosexuals to be married?
I'm not asking this rhetorically or from the perspective of a blinkered conservative. I fully support the right of homosexual couples to be married. I suspect Kerry does, too, but doesn't have the balls to support it publicly. Why? Because all the polls say that most Americans are opposed to it. And he knows that the moment he advocates it, he will lose the support of a great many swing voters. So, he is safe to not come out for gay marriage.
If Kerry opposes the proposed Federal Marriage Act or the Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as being only a union of a man and a woman, then that's just great. But, then follows two points ---and count them closely: he will try to hide behind the civil union thing as though that were enough. And the other, more monstrous, point? The Democrats will let him off the hook.
Electability is Kerry's running mate. The Democrats have no principles and, on that basis alone, deserve to lose.
By the way, on their Fox News program last week, Mort Kondracke asked Fred Barnes of The Weekly Standard point blank to explain why he opposes gay marriage. Barnes sputtered a bit and said he didn't have enough time to lay it all out. Horseshit. He'd better come up with a better non-answer than that the next time the crypto-conservative Kondracke asks the question.
Like I said, those who are opposed either have no reason for it or a religious/moral one. Neither one works.