Two Alaska legislators Monday released a joint statement to apologize for and explain the reaction of many of their caucus’ members to a an unexpected question Friday about gay rights issues.
Several members of the House majority caucus, including Speaker Mike Chenault, R-Nikiski, laughed Friday when asked a question by the Juneau Empire’s reporter about whether the caucus would support domestic partnerships or civil unions for same-sex couples.
That response — more than the answer from House Majority Leader Lance Pruitt, R-Anchorage, that the caucus had not discussed the issue and does not consider it part of their “guiding principles” this year — caught the attention of local and national blogs — many of which showed a video clip of the question and response while suggesting the laughter demonstrated disrespect to the gay community or supporters of same-sex unions.
On Monday morning, Chenault and Pruitt released their joint statement.
“I would like to make two things clear: laughter was not an appropriate response under any circumstances, and we regret and apologize for the reaction to that question,” said Pruitt in the statement. “It was a serious question; it is a serious issue — and it is not something the Caucus has taken a position on.”
“I completely agree: laughter was inappropriate,” Chenault added in the statement. “However, it’s clear from the totality of the response and circumstances the laughter was in reaction to which legislator had to field the difficult question, and did not go to the merits of the issue. Regardless, laughter was not appropriate and for that we sincerely apologize.”
The Empire posed the question due to a recent survey by Raleigh, N.C.-based Public Policy Polling that found 67 percent of Alaskan respondents favor some form of legal recognition for same-sex couples — either marriage, which the poll also found a narrow majority oppose, or civil unions — and just 30 percent oppose legal recognition altogether.
The PPP survey was conducted on Feb. 4 and Feb. 5 and sampled registered voters in Alaska. The results on same-sex unions were released Feb. 8.
Pruitt said the statement was released Monday to clear up “misunderstanding” as to the legislators’ laughter.
“We felt that there was a misunderstanding in the public as to what took place last week,” Pruitt said. “We were trying to talk about our guiding principles, and I think that became a distraction from our guiding principles.”
Pruitt added, “Obviously, there’s times when you have to step back and go, ‘All right, if somebody took this not in the manner that it was (intended) and they misunderstood, well, we need to step up and apologize for the misunderstanding.’”
Pruitt also said the question was unexpected, which he said may have prompted some of the laughter.
“It caught everyone off-guard,” said Pruitt. “We were talking about our guiding principles. It was almost kind of out of left field. Everyone wasn’t expecting it. So I think there was a little bit of humor as well as, ‘All right, it’s a tough one. Who’s going to take a question?’ Because whoever answers it, it doesn’t matter which side of the issue you are, it’s always a tough question.”
As to whether the issue will be discussed in the caucus now, Pruitt said he does not know.
“We’ll probably talk about the meeting, especially if we’re going to probably address the issue of laughing,” Pruitt said. “I don’t know. If someone wants to bring it up, then we can have the discussion. But at this point, I don’t know.”
• Contact reporter Mark D. Miller at 586-1821 or at mark.d.miller@juneauempire.com.
Comments (68)
Add commentBigots
Republicans are and always have been racist sexist homophobic bigots.
glasseye
I just can't believe what you are saying. You forgot ignorant as well. What were you thinking?
I would contend that a republican (there are exceptions) are not racist/sexist by themselves, but when you group them together there is a tendancy to lean that way ignorantly and without appology.
correction, Rain
They do offer apologies...once they realize that their behavior has become a political liability.
Doesn't mean they don't feel that way though.
Makes one wonder how anyone could be a gay republican when they're ridiculed and reviled by their own party. Being gay isn't a choice...but being republican is.
The question
I don't see how the question came out of left field. If the topic of discussion what about core or guiding principles, one might be inclined to be ready to answer questions concerning those principles, even in regard to LGBT issues. I'm concerned because the question could have been about mental or physical diabilities, or maybe about senior or behaviroal health. I fear the the Alaska GOP would have had the same reaction. I found the laughter both offensive and a slap in the face to constituents. Shame on these so called "legislatures".
aww
did i hurt your fellings
let me call an ambulance.
Geez people what a bunch of crybabies,do you really think the so called homophobes and racist(as you people claim they are)
really give a sheite as to your opinion in this matter.
The question was really a good one as it covered some serious and fairly simple matter but society really isnt ready for this quite yet.
Hey keep tryin that is what america is all about.
ha ha
Could have been the thought
Could have been the thought of being the legislator who would get roasted by the Alaskan populace for broaching the idea... I would certainly respond with a "are you freaking kidding me" laughing fit... Not that I am opposed to it, but I am not willing to get crucified for it.
ouch
I'm not sure if the apology was any less embarrassing than the gaffe. Maybe they should have left this one alone.
Not an apology
They apologized for the 'misunderstanding' - not the actual laughter... for that they made an excuse
Inappropriate response
Regardless, "action speaks louder than words" and now we know where the House Majority stands. Just remember Alaska is a small community figure of speech. I have friends and family come from professional background and that are Gay and Lesbians.
GOP's need to show some respect for our communities.
Surprizing? NO!
Considering the GOP is moving us closer to the 16th century than the 21st the laughter is not surprising.
LOL!
Who could keep a straight face after that question? Gay unions? Really? AFL/CIO dues paying collective bargaining units representing groups based on sexual preferences? WAAAAHAAAAHAAAA!
Does that clear the way for organizing the Goat Butters and Sheep Shankers of America?
Homosexuality
Latitude says 'Being gay isn't a choice'....this is totally false. There is no 'gay gene' or any such thing. No one is born a homosexual. Homosexuality is totally a lifestyle choice. That being said, I do not believe homosexuals should be persecuted in any manner but neither are they 'entitled' to any sort of 'civil rights'. A black man cannot change the color of his skin but any man can change his sexual choices. I also do not like the word 'homophobic'.....phobic denotes the fear of something. I don't believe society is afraid of homosexuality at all. I do believe 'homophobic' is a word the homosexual community came up with to try to demonize anyone who dares speak his belief that a homosexual lifestyle is immoral. All this being said, I am no better than any homosexual....I just practice different kinds of sin. We are all separated from God and only a Devine Savior can save any of us.
Speaker Mike Chenault
Speaker Mike Chenault education level is a GED.
Charleylarson what planet did
Charleylarson what planet did you come from? You have answers for everything don't you. Can share this theory of your with documentation?
charleylarson
So Charley, that means that your heterosexuality is your CHOICE? You could go both ways, but you CHOOSE to be heterosexual?
Got it.
Charleylarson
Science will (and has in some ways) prove you the idiot. But feel free to cling to your religiousity. It is that same mentality that once stated that blacks weren't human. Jokes on you, Blacks are more "pure" human than the whites. Genetically whites have more neanderthal DNA...
Your words try to make it look like you are taking the high road by not condeming and saying empty niceities. I see right through them.
Juneauakgrrl
Have to agree with you Jnuakgrrl. I am stright, no inkling to be gay (though I will admit to appreciating what an attractive man can look like), but I don't believe there is enough booze in the world for me to CHOOSE to have a gay experience. Nothing wrong with it, just not how my genes dicatate my sexual orientation and proclivity. Sexuality is a scale, not a black and white thing. Some are straight, some gay, some bi, heck some a without sexual desire. All are welcome on this earth. If there is a God, it would be his/her place to make the divine determination on appropriatness of it all.
I for one think God would support sex in all of its proper adult facets, gay straight or other wise (even the old ma$+erba+ion).
So, rain...
...does preference of both sheep and goats make you "bi"? Would that form of sexual orientation also be acceptable to God? Fair questions. Moreover, (back to the subject) does sexual preference constitute the need for arbitration by a collective bargaining unit? How about a vegan union? Paper or plastic?
seriously skirkz?
Sex with animals is beastiality, not homosexuality. If straight sex between adult humans doesn't open the door to sex with animals, then gay sex between adult humans doesn't either. The fact that you would equate homosexuals with animals shows that you simply don't know what you're talking about.
Skirtz
I guess if that is your thing...
And no. The empty comparison of beastiality to homosexuality is weak at best. It is like comparing catching and killing fish to human murder (get real). There is a big difference between sexual diversity and sexual devience. Saying homosexuality, or anything outside of the narrow view of much of the religious right, is a Choice is so lacking in any concrete understanding it is generally left to the religious far right, the fearful of anything different, or those individuals who are too afraid to face their own sexual proclivities.
To your collective bargaining unit statement, I would say that it should be based upon you job class (trade etc) and not sexual orientation. Did I miss something in your rant?
Kara...
...who's to decide? Your shop steward? Your business agent?
Apparently Skirkz, you
Apparently Skirkz, you believe it's YOU that gets to decide.
No, those people aren't there to decide...they are there
to DEFEND the rights of all the union members they represent...this means that union officials have an obligation to work actively, at all times, against all forms of bigotry, because bigotry is an attack on working people, and is used most of the time to divide working people against each other.
States are now approving same-sex marriage at the ballot box...the tide has turned and the fight against LGBT rights needs to end, since it is a dishonorable, ugly fight and never had any justification.
LGBT people have nothing in common with sexual deviants-and LGBT people have never conspired to "turn" anyone's child gay...such a conspiracy is impossible, since sexual orientation can't be changed.
Rain
You TOTALLY missed the point. Gay unions is the subject here. Oh, excuse me, laughing at the absurdity of the notion is. Read the material and gauge the sarcasm. Keep up, rain.
Sorry skirkz
Sorry it took me a moment to get your humorous play on the word union (i.e. civil union, gay union) refering to a organization of many individuals in the same trade etc.
Perhaps this in reference to pipe fittings eh. Wouldn't that be funny.
CLarson
Please do some research before putting foot on mouth! Homosexuality IS NOT a choice! Think about it why would ANYONE choose to be gay and be made fun of as you and the Right Wing Conservatives Bible thumpers believe. It has been PROVEN that is high suicide rate among those individuals that tried to go straight. Please look at the law California just pass prohibiting the act of trying to make people to become straight. God make everyone in is image. That means that gay or straight ALL of are Gods making. God DOES NOT make mistakes. It is ONLY you Bible thumper that miss the boat!
You guys should lighten up on
You guys should lighten up on Charley. He's a good guy. He always has been. I don't agree with his stances, but he has always been a basically good-hearted person.
J.E.
If someone makes such inflammatory statements, he needs to be prepared for the backlash. I'm sure he doesn't need to hide behind your skirts.
JE
No one is going to lighten up on someone who is ignorant and incorrect. Even if he's a good guy, which I don't doubt he could possibly be. Goodhearted or not, we are reacting to his ridiculous statements. CharleyLarson: as a few have said, if any man can change their sexual orientation, you can become a homosexual, no? If not, then you really need to sit back and keep quiet because it doesn't go one way but not the other. If you sincerely believe homophobia doesn't exist you need to reevaluate your thoughts on that. Ever heard of Westboro? What are they except for terrified of gay people? On a talk show when one straight man tried to put his arm around a member of Westboro he frantically tried to escape as if it were a pile of feces trying to touch him and not a human being. Skirkz: Sex (LOVE) between two CONSENTING ADULTS is no way comparable to sex between a human and an animal. Some people are way too concerned with the sexual orientation of people they aren't having sex with. How does my having the same rights as you ruin anything for you? If we're going to get on the "homosexuality is a sin" subject, why don't we make it illegal for people who have cheated or lied to get married? Hypocritical in so many ways. Also skirkz you really need to stop giving yourself the "thumbs up" on your comments. No one is ignorant enough to give you those except yourself. Back to the article: the apology is a good call, but they never would have made it if there wasn't a NATIONAL backlash. Keep up, Alaska.
Bill, have you checked google
Bill, have you checked google to see if they have a translator from your language to english?