This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2004, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

BOSTON - Democrats approved their national party platform Tuesday almost entirely under the radar - and with good reason.

That's the way the script, bland as it is, was written.

Party activists did their best to ensure there would be no messy convention floor-fights marring a made-for-television show of unity and moderation. They succeeded.

In the Utah delegation meeting, Salt Lake County Councilman Joe Hatch took the lead in encouraging a straight "yes" vote for the 37-page document without debate.

“Though you may disagree with elements of the platform here and there, let's stand with our presidential candidate,” Hatch said. “If he wants to run from the middle, I will stand with him.”

No need, added Hatch, to show “dissent that really isn't there.”

That means showing party unity on such fractious issues as the war in Iraq and gay marriage.

Some activists during platform drafting earlier this month pushed for things like creation of a “Department of Peace” or a declaration that U.S. troops would be pulled out of Iraq on Jan. 21, said Philip Bernal, Utah's representative on the platform committee.

Those proposals fell flat. In fact, the final platform doesn't even come right out and criticize the Iraq war.

Instead, it says that “people of good will disagree about whether America should have gone to war in Iraq . . . [but] the administration badly exaggerated its case.”

Having gone to war, it continues, “we cannot afford to fail at peace. We cannot allow a failed state in Iraq that inevitably would become a haven for terrorists and a destabilizing force in the Middle East.”

The platform's prescribed formula for success is a vague call to “internationalize” the conflict.

Rather than milquetoast, the plank on Iraq is “mainstream,” said Hatch. “It reflects the values of all Americans, including Utahns.”

Delegates express similar party harmony on the platform's broadly framed plank on gay rights.

The platform opposes a federal constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage but never specifically endorses the right of such unions.

“We support full inclusion of gay and lesbian families in the life of our nation and seek equal responsibilities, benefits and protections for these families,” says the platform. “In our country, marriage has been defined at the state level for 200 years and we believe it should continued to be defined there.”

Utah delegate Michael Braxton, a member of the pro-gay rights Stonewall caucus, said he is satisfied with the platform's treatment of the issue.

“It's not not dealing with it,” said Braxton. “Everyone at the gay caucus was very united and very behind the way it is written.

"When you start using the words 'gay marriage,' it's almost like playing into the Republican right's strategy. It's helping them divide the country. . . using the words as a dagger.”

Braxton said he and other gays and lesbians are mature enough to have a broader view of the party's principles and goals without narrowing everything down to a single issue.

“John Kerry and John Edwards are the most gay-friendly candidates for president in the history of America,” he said. “If you support equal families, no matter how it's worded, John Kerry and John Edwards are your men.”