Guiliani:
What is your position on the proposed constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman?
I don't think we need a constitutional amendment at this point. If states begin to establish gay marriage through judicial activism then we should have a constitutional amendment.
What is your position on civil unions between same sex partners?
I clearly believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, although I did support domestic partnerships and still do, [as] a contractual relationship.
McCain:
What is your position on the proposed constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman?
I believe the institution of marriage should be protected and defined as a union between one man and one woman. This definition recognizes the fundamental role of the traditional family in shaping, stabilizing and strengthening our communities and our nation. I agree with the Founding Fathers that, as with most issues critical to the preservation and health of our civil society, the basic responsibility for preserving and strengthening the traditional family should reside at the level of government closest to the people. Where State and local governments act to preserve the traditional family the Courts should not overstep their authority and thwart the Constitutional right of the people to protect the traditional family. If the Supreme Court should ever exceed its Constitutional authority and strike down state or local laws designed to protect the traditional family, I would support a Constitutional amendment to define the family as a union between one man and one woman.
What is your position on civil unions between same sex partners?
While, as a federalist, I recognize the right of the states to regulate the institution of marriage and to pass civil union laws, I strongly believe in the current law that declares that no other state should be legally bound to recognize same sex marriages or unions that might be legal in other places. But while the citizens of each state should decide this question, I personally oppose civil unions that for all intents and purposes confer the same status as traditional marriage. I am not against people entering into contracts or exchanging powers of attorney, a right that most states already afford to all citizens, regardless of sexual orientation. While, as a federalist, I recognize the right of the states to regulate the institution of marriage and to pass civil union laws, I strongly believe in the current law that declares that no other state should be legally bound to recognize same sex marriages or unions that might be legal in other places. But while the citizens of each state should decide this question, I personally oppose civil unions that for all intents and purposes confer the same status as traditional marriage. I am not against people entering into contracts or exchanging powers of attorney, a right that most states already afford to all citizens, regardless of sexual orientation.
And a link to the Democrats view:
Don't ask, they'll tell - National Journal - MSNBC.com
Read each candidate's views in both parties. There are a lot of issues.