Advertisement
Obama Backs Gay Marriage
WASHINGTON -- In a nod to a dramatic shift in public opinion, Barack Obama on Wednesday became the first sitting president to announce his support for same-sex marriage.
In a sit-down interview with ABC's Robin Roberts, Obama completed what has been a markedly long and oft-mocked evolution on the matter.
"I've always been adamant that gay and lesbian Americans should be treated fairly," Obama told Roberts, in an interview that will air in full on ABC's "Good Morning America" Thursday.
"I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together, when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don't Ask Don't Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married," he said.
The statement constitutes an act of political bravery on the president's behalf, as well as a major victory for the gay rights community, which has been pushing him to declare his support for marriage equality for several years. With the issue back in the news this week, the pressure intensified.
On Sunday, Vice President Joseph Biden told NBC's "Meet The Press" that he was personally comfortable with same-sex marriage, which was followed the next day by Education Secretary Arne Duncan saying the same.
The White House insisted that there was no daylight between the vice president's position and the president's, noting that Biden clarified his statement as being in reference to civil rights for gay couples. But the explanation was largely dismissed by both supporters and critics as a convenient way for the president to signal support for marriage equality without having to declare it himself.
On Tuesday evening, the state of North Carolina passed an amendment that defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman. The president expressed his disappointment with the measure, but it remained difficult to square his opposition to a measure outlawing same-sex marriage with his opposition to same-sex marriage itself.
As the political pressure continued to mount, the president finally chose to speak out Wednesday, with the White House hastily scheduling a sit-down interview.
“It’s interesting, some of this is also generational,” the president said. “You know when I go to college campuses, sometimes I talk to college Republicans who think that I have terrible policies on the economy, on foreign policy, but are very clear that when it comes to same sex equality or, you know, believe in equality. They are much more comfortable with it. You know, Malia and Sasha, they have friends whose parents are same-sex couples. There have been times where Michelle and I have been sitting around the dinner table and we’re talking about their friends and their parents and Malia and Sasha, it wouldn’t dawn on them that somehow their friends’ parents would be treated differently. It doesn’t make sense to them and frankly, that’s the kind of thing that prompts a change in perspective.”
The president's support of same-sex marriage will have little political impact, from a practical standpoint, as much of the activity on the issue is currently occurring in the states and the courts. Already the Obama administration's Department of Justice has stopped defending the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage as a legal union between a man and a woman. Legislation to overturn DOMA outright would likely be blocked by congressional Republicans.
The more promising path for same-sex marriage advocates remains a friendly hearing by the United States Supreme Court.
Still, the symbolism of Obama's remarks is hard to ignore. In becoming the first president to publicly support marriage equality, he sets the bar for its political acceptance. He also has the ability to shape public opinion further on the matter.
Of course, there may be drawbacks to such a strong expression of support. While recent polls show that popular support for marriage equality is gaining widespread acceptance, some pivotal swing states remain largely opposed to the concept. And one of them, North Carolina, remains a major target for the president's reelection campaign.
"The question is, is there a risk?" a prominent Democratic Party official who requested anonymity told The Huffington Post after Biden's remarks. "It is not nationwide [polling] we are talking about. We are talking about Virginia, North Carolina and other swing states. And we are talking about, would Karl Rove and his team stoop to using horribly grotesque and hateful tactics ... and would that peel off 10,000 votes?"
As of Wednesday, that question was hypothetical. Now, it's a critical component of the 2012 election.
www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...45.html
WASHINGTON -- In a nod to a dramatic shift in public opinion, Barack Obama on Wednesday became the first sitting president to announce his support for same-sex marriage.
In a sit-down interview with ABC's Robin Roberts, Obama completed what has been a markedly long and oft-mocked evolution on the matter.
"I've always been adamant that gay and lesbian Americans should be treated fairly," Obama told Roberts, in an interview that will air in full on ABC's "Good Morning America" Thursday.
"I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together, when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don't Ask Don't Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married," he said.
The statement constitutes an act of political bravery on the president's behalf, as well as a major victory for the gay rights community, which has been pushing him to declare his support for marriage equality for several years. With the issue back in the news this week, the pressure intensified.
On Sunday, Vice President Joseph Biden told NBC's "Meet The Press" that he was personally comfortable with same-sex marriage, which was followed the next day by Education Secretary Arne Duncan saying the same.
The White House insisted that there was no daylight between the vice president's position and the president's, noting that Biden clarified his statement as being in reference to civil rights for gay couples. But the explanation was largely dismissed by both supporters and critics as a convenient way for the president to signal support for marriage equality without having to declare it himself.
On Tuesday evening, the state of North Carolina passed an amendment that defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman. The president expressed his disappointment with the measure, but it remained difficult to square his opposition to a measure outlawing same-sex marriage with his opposition to same-sex marriage itself.
As the political pressure continued to mount, the president finally chose to speak out Wednesday, with the White House hastily scheduling a sit-down interview.
“It’s interesting, some of this is also generational,” the president said. “You know when I go to college campuses, sometimes I talk to college Republicans who think that I have terrible policies on the economy, on foreign policy, but are very clear that when it comes to same sex equality or, you know, believe in equality. They are much more comfortable with it. You know, Malia and Sasha, they have friends whose parents are same-sex couples. There have been times where Michelle and I have been sitting around the dinner table and we’re talking about their friends and their parents and Malia and Sasha, it wouldn’t dawn on them that somehow their friends’ parents would be treated differently. It doesn’t make sense to them and frankly, that’s the kind of thing that prompts a change in perspective.”
The president's support of same-sex marriage will have little political impact, from a practical standpoint, as much of the activity on the issue is currently occurring in the states and the courts. Already the Obama administration's Department of Justice has stopped defending the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage as a legal union between a man and a woman. Legislation to overturn DOMA outright would likely be blocked by congressional Republicans.
The more promising path for same-sex marriage advocates remains a friendly hearing by the United States Supreme Court.
Still, the symbolism of Obama's remarks is hard to ignore. In becoming the first president to publicly support marriage equality, he sets the bar for its political acceptance. He also has the ability to shape public opinion further on the matter.
Of course, there may be drawbacks to such a strong expression of support. While recent polls show that popular support for marriage equality is gaining widespread acceptance, some pivotal swing states remain largely opposed to the concept. And one of them, North Carolina, remains a major target for the president's reelection campaign.
"The question is, is there a risk?" a prominent Democratic Party official who requested anonymity told The Huffington Post after Biden's remarks. "It is not nationwide [polling] we are talking about. We are talking about Virginia, North Carolina and other swing states. And we are talking about, would Karl Rove and his team stoop to using horribly grotesque and hateful tactics ... and would that peel off 10,000 votes?"
As of Wednesday, that question was hypothetical. Now, it's a critical component of the 2012 election.
www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...45.html
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Fri, May 11, 2012 - 9:44 AM"The president stressed that this is a personal position, and that he still supports the concept of states’ deciding the issue on their own."
abcnews.go.com/blogs/poli...et-married/
So lemme get this straight...
After years of "evolution," Obama finally comes out and says he supports the right of gays to get married, but that "he still supports the concept of states’ deciding the issue on their own," and that's heralded as a "brave" position to take.
Ron Paul has stated the exact same position for over a decade, and he's called "anti-gay."
Odd. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Fri, May 11, 2012 - 10:22 AMOne key difference is that Ron Paul supports the Defense of Marriage Act, Obama thinks it is unconstitutional. As a matter of fact, Ron Paul issued full throated opposition to the idea of gay marriage. So regardless of his stance on states rights issues, he personally opposes gay marriage and equates homosexuality to "sexual deviance".
Ron Paul: “The Defense of Marriage Act was enacted in 1996 to stop Big Government in Washington from re-defining marriage and forcing its definition on the States. Like the majority of Iowans, I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman and must be protected.
“I supported the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’ constitutional authority to define what other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a same sex marriage license issued in another state. I have also cosponsored the Marriage Protection Act, which would remove challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act from the jurisdiction of the federal courts.
“The people of Iowa overwhelmingly supported, both houses of the Legislature passed, and the Governor signed into law the Iowa Defense Of Marriage Act in 1998. Iowans then valiantly recalled three activist Judges who spurned the will of the people by over-turning the state’s law.
“Today’s announcement that the Obama Administration will abandon its obligation to enforce DOMA is truly disappointing and shows a profound lack of respect for the Constitution and the Rule of Law. President Obama has just unconstitutionally said that Iowa should have to allow San Francisco and New York City decide its marriage laws. That position is unacceptable.
“The Administration’s dereliction throws the door wide open for special interests to abuse Federal power and attempt to force Iowa to recognize non-traditional marriage. Upcoming battles are looming just over the horizon.
“I will stand with the people of Iowa, against Unconstitutional federal power grabs, and will fight to protect each state’s right not to be forced to recognize a same sex marriage against the will of its people. If I were a member of the Iowa legislature, I would do all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue judges to impose a new definition of marriage on the people of my state.”
theiowarepublican.com/2011/ro...on-doma/
Clearly Paul is pro state but personally anti-gay.
And while Obama supports these decisions being made at the state level, it is clear that he also thinks the equal protection clause should apply, hence his opposition to DOMA. In other words, the equal protection clause may well be the future vehicle by which states are forced to recognize the gay marriages of other states. So no, Obama and Paul do not have the "same exact position".
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Fri, May 11, 2012 - 10:27 AMAnd here is the entire transcript of Obama's interview, feel free to compare and contrast with Ron Paul's words on the issue of homosexuality and gay marriage. abcnews.go.com/Politics/t...obama/story
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Fri, May 11, 2012 - 7:21 PM<After years of "evolution," Obama finally comes out and says he supports the right of gays to get married, but that "he still supports the concept of states’ deciding the issue on their own," and that's heralded as a "brave" position to take.>
For a sitting president in the middle of an election cycle, where in swing states the difference between winning & losing is a few %, if only a few % are bigoted enough to not vote for him because of this stance - it IS (in my inestimable opinion) rather "brave". It's not inconcieveable that such a comment could cost him one important state, like Florida, which has a large Hispanic population which is against gay marriage.
<Ron Paul has stated the exact same position for over a decade, and he's called "anti-gay.">
No. THIS is why he was considered "anti-gay", my friend: www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/1...00.html
This, too: www.towleroad.com/2011/12/r...ntext.html
Odd.
No, just saying, 'I did not know what was being written' when it just so happens that what was written there (and other places) was in many cases exactly what he was publicly saying elsewhere...well, one only will believe that he did not know of these statements if one does not want to admit that one knew of those statements.
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Fri, May 11, 2012 - 11:10 PMI don't know if it's brave. Obama may be well aware that his standing within the decidedly left is weak and may be banking on lighting a fire beneath the activist types in an election where turnout might make all the difference. He probably thinks he's toast in the very religiously conservative states anyway. My inclination is that he's always been pro gay marriage but made a political calculation that coming out of the closet (so to speak) now had more potential political benefits than dangers. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 9:45 PMAs both myself and Andrew have pointed out, it could ultimately hurt him in key swing states thereby costing him electoral vote. But then again, I also recognize that it could really motivate the progressive base. Ultimately I think coming out in support in the middle of an election cycle could go either way, and it is that gamble that makes it a brave move in my opinion. This is not a position any sitting President has ever taken, the outcome of which is an unknown. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 10:56 PMIt could also help him in swing states by firing up the activist left. There's no real way of knowing whether this is a net positive or a net negative. With polls showing now a slight majority in favor of same sex marriages and a whopping 65% to 30% support for gay marriages among those under 30, who tend to be more of the activist type, Obama may have come to conclude that the benefits of supporting same sex marriage now outweigh the drawbacks.
"This is not a position any sitting President has ever taken, the outcome of which is an unknown."
And never before has a majority supported it. Following the polls doesn't strike me as necessarily brave. Is it just a coincidence that he now publicly supports it once polls shift in favor of it? -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 11:33 PM<<There's no real way of knowing whether this is a net positive or a net negative.
Which is ultimately my point, it is the first position of it's kind by any sitting President and we can't know the ultimate outcome. I think in another 10 years, the way things are trending, that such a position would be a safe bet.
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Mon, May 14, 2012 - 4:00 AM<< It could also help him in swing states by firing up the activist left.>>
You know, those awful people who want nanny state government out of their private lives.
I love it how anyone who doesn't particularly feel like letting a lot of myopic elderly "movement conservative" dingbats out of the Goldwater era rule America unconditionally forever is part of some presumed "activist left." Next we'll be hearing the one about Walter Cronkite's eyebrows or how the Rosenbergs lost us the Korean war.
<< Following the polls doesn't strike me as necessarily brave.>>
Heeding some oft-divorced hired mouth on FM radio on the subject of "traditional marriage" isn't exactly a profile in moral courage either.
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 1:48 PM<As both myself and Andrew have pointed out, it could ultimately hurt him in key swing states thereby costing him electoral vote.>
I still think that this is the sleeping giant.
wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/post/po...-florida
This could EASILY cost him Florida.
www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/...nd.html
AND...Ohio.
Those are the two that are necessary. Election goes to Romney.
<It could also help him in swing states by firing up the activist left.>
Ron, the "activist left" is so pissed at him, this won't sway them (in my opinion) a bit. Maybe amongst the gays, but...that's about it.
And, Jeff...I really am wondering about your constant use of "full throated" all of a sudden in a conversation about Gay Marriage.
<...hardly a full throated defense of gay marriage.>
Seriously. Again. I didn't think that you had a sense of humor. Good on'ya.
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 1:35 PM"Obama may be well aware..."
"He probably thinks..."
"...made a political calculation..."
I like to think that he may have simply been doing the right thing. I know...I'm naive and all...
<Isn't getting married in a church kind of a religious thing ? Shouldn't religious people be allowed to make there own rules about how marriage works in there churchs, they are supposed to be there church's after all arnt they ? If you dont like there rules, why not get a civil marriage ?>
Um...Elo? Any change in laws would not FORCE churches to marry gay people...
<Thats if im understanding this debate right, its about Church marriages isnt it ?>
No. It's about laws. Whether or not gay people can get a marriage certificate. It does not matter where they marry. They can do it civil if they want, but they get a legal certificate saying that they are married in the eyes of the state, which gives them the same legal protections as straights get.
<All that being said i think Chruchs shouldn't be allowed to be openly anti gay, just as there are laws against racism.>
Um...check out our First Amendment. They are allowed to be as anti-gay as they want.
-
-
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Fri, May 11, 2012 - 9:59 AMgawker.com/5909002/bara...3366064585933
ABC News has only released one brief clip of Obama's conversation about gay marriage today, but it seems fairly clear from the network's coverage that his announcement amounts to much less than meets the eye. He now believes that gay couples should be able to marry. He doesn't believe they have a right to do so. This is like saying that black children and white children ought to attend the same schools, but if the people of Alabama reject that notion—what are you gonna do?
The key language in the ABC News write-up is this:
The president stressed that this is a personal position, and that he still supports the concept of states deciding the issue on their own.
On this afternoon's special broadcast, Jake Tapper echoed that point: "The president said he thought this was a state-by-state issue."
Well, before Roe v. Wade, abortion was a state-by-state issue, too. So was slavery. There are 44 states in which gay men and women are currently barred from marrying one another. Obama's position is that, while he would have voted the other way, those 44 states are perfectly within their rights to arbitrarily restrict the access of certain individuals to marriage rights based solely on their sexual orientation.
That is a half-assed, cowardly cop-out. There are currently at least three cases winding their way toward federal courts that address the issue of whether (among other things) the equal protection clause of the constitution guarantees gay men and women the same access to marriage rights as heterosexual men and women—the Proposition 8 case, in which David Boies and Ted Olson challenged California's ban on gay marriage, and several challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act, which bars gay men and woman from receiving federal marriage benefits and allows states to refuse to recognize valid gay marriages. Obama's Justice Department has admirably declined to defend the constitutionality of DOMA. But the position he enunciated today is in opposition to Boies and Olson: Obama is saying that if he were a judge, he would have rejected Boies and Olson's constitutional arguments and affirmed the right of Californians to enshrine bigotry in their state constitution.
Equality is not a state-by-state issue. There is no reason other than ignorance and hatred that two men can get married in New York and not North Carolina. At a time when vindictive hucksters are rolling out anti-gay marriage amendments across the nation, and when conflicting state and federal laws portend an insoluble morass of divorce, custody, and estate issues, and when gay Americans are turning to the U.S. Constitution and the courts to seek an affirmation of their humanity, "it's a state-by-state issue" is a shameful dodge.
Is it a politically wise dodge? Maybe. This was obviously a hastily arranged interview—we're told that ABC News' Robin Roberts, who is close to Michelle Obama, was only tapped in the last 48 hours by the White House to come down—designed to clean up the mess left by Biden's pro-gay marriage comments in as advantageous way as possible. And for Obama to declare that he considers North Carolina and other states' bans on gay marriage to be unconstitutional would probably energize the GOP base. But those bans are unconstitutional. And anyone who supports their legitimacy—as Obama just did, in no uncertain terms—even if they oppose the policy, is adopting the retrograde position in the contemporary gay marriage debate. Obama is moving backward, not forward. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Fri, May 11, 2012 - 11:07 AMThere are very specific and stated reasons by both Paul and Obama as to why they think it should be settled at the state level. Obama's point of view is that re-federalizing the issue could lead to Republicans pushing for a Constitutional amendment defining marriage between a man and a woman. Ron Paul's fear is that federalizing the issue could lead states to be accountable to the equal protection cluase, thereby forcing states to recognize the gay marriages of other states. That is a fundamental difference.
Obama: "Well, I-- you know, my Justice Department has already-- said that it is not gonna defend-- the Defense Against Marriage Act. That we consider that a violation of equal protection clause. And I agree with them on that. You know? I helped to prompt that-- that move on the part of the Justice Department.
Part of the reason that I thought it was important-- to speak to this issue was the fact that-- you know, I've got an opponent on-- on the other side in the upcoming presidential election, who wants to-- re-federalize the issue and-- institute a constitutional amendment-- that would prohibit gay marriage. And, you know, I think it is a mistake to-- try to make what has traditionally been a state issue into a national issue."
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Fri, May 11, 2012 - 2:19 PMOr to put it more succinctly: Obama opposes the federalization of the gay marriage issue because it could open the door to a federal ban. Ron Paul opposes the federalization of the gay marriage issue because it may lead to nationwide legalization based on the equal protection clause. -
-
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Mon, May 14, 2012 - 8:52 AMit's a virtual ban against gay marriage at the federal level. it also flouts the full faith and credit clause of the constitution.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full...family_law -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Mon, May 14, 2012 - 2:34 PMuspolitics.tribe.net/thread/...8f745c78
Also, you never answered my question. Were civil unions even presented as an option in 1996? Remember, this was 16 years ago, a lifetime ago in the progression of the gay marriage issue in this country. Obama may well of seen civil unions as a reasonable option and switched his support to that as a compromise, as many did at that time. That is until it was made clearby the gay community that civil unions did not cut it. It took many Americans some time to realize that it was just not adequate. I am not saying it was the right decision, and I am not saying he should not have come out sooner in support, but I am saying that there are reasons beyond purely political considerations. In particular being that Obama's generation has come around slower than the younger generation to this issue, but coming around they are. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Wed, May 16, 2012 - 8:03 AMthe marriage issue has been around since at least the early 1970s (see:baker v nelson in minnesota and other cases since that one). now, i'm not saying that's the same thing as acceptance, but plenty of people have been making arguments in favor of gay marriage for almost 40 years.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_unions
it looks like yes, they would have been an option, but only if you had followed the lead of those socialist europeans! the united states, in the state of vermont, followed suit 4 years later.
a pretty good book, long but worthwhile:
www.amazon.com/Courting-J.../0465015131 -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Wed, May 16, 2012 - 10:25 AM<<now, i'm not saying that's the same thing as acceptance, but plenty of people have been making arguments in favor of gay marriage for almost 40 years.
Sure, I understand the history.
<<it looks like yes, they would have been an option, but only if you had followed the lead of those socialist europeans! the united states, in the state of vermont, followed suit 4 years later.
So it was not an option for Obama to support in 1996 being that it was not being proposed in any US state. At that time he could either support gay marriage or not, there was no compromise option on the table. Once the compromise option was on the table he took what he thought was the middle ground, but now recognizing that this compromise is not adequate. What year did Obama state his support for Civil Unions? -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Wed, May 16, 2012 - 10:53 AMaccording to this timeline, 2004:
thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011...-equality/ -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Wed, May 16, 2012 - 4:23 PMBeing that 1996 was the only time previous to his current support that he referenced the term "marriage" in regards to his support, is the following really out of bounds to accept as the truth? From your own link:
2011 (June 19) YES HE SIGNED IT, NO HE DIDN’T SUPPORT MARRIAGE: According to the New York Times, Pfeiffer was “mistaken.” Obama did fill out the 1996 questionnaire, but he was “really referring to civil unions.”
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Fri, May 18, 2012 - 7:53 AMlol. they say that 15 years later. i mean, there was a legitimate effort on behalf of the obama administration to ensure that obama didn't support gay marriage, out of concern for public opinion polls. that said, i trust a questionnaire from 15 years ago more than i trust a paid spinmeister.
are you honestly going to argue that obama meant civil unions when that wasn't even on the ballot in any state in the united states and was four years away from entering the international lexicon. that strains credulity. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Wed, May 23, 2012 - 10:19 AMand that concern seems to be ill-founded.
see:
www.washingtonpost.com/politi...ry.html
By Scott Clement and Sandhya Somashekhar, Published: May 22
Public opinion continues to shift in favor of same-sex marriage, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, which also finds initial signs that President Obama’s support for the idea may have changed a few minds.
Overall, 53 percent of Americans say gay marriage should be legal, hitting a high mark in support while showing a dramatic turnaround from just six years ago, when just 36 percent thought it should be legal. Thirty-nine percent, a new low, say gay marriage should be illegal. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Wed, May 23, 2012 - 11:02 AMYou may well be right in that this could be a safe bet, but as of now it is still a bit of an unknown in regards to how it will affect voter turnout. And as previously indicated, while the national poll is an indicator of where the nation as a whole is, it is not necessarily reflective of numbers in the specific swing states needed to win the electoral vote. Is there a poll for these individual swing states? -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Wed, May 23, 2012 - 11:42 AMuspolitics.tribe.net/thread/...c31f73e5
just because someone opposes same-sex marriage doesn't necessarily mean they won't vote for obama. it's a pretty good bet they won't, though.
food for thought:
www.tnr.com/blog/the-stu...g-pundits-map
"But here's the other thing about the people I spoke with: almost to a person, they said they don't vote -- usually not in the general election, and certainly not in the primaries. Which to me was a further reminder that what we're seeing in Arkansas and Kentucky tonight, is a very, very selective and circumstantial statement. For pundits to make anything more of it than that is to be willfully geographically and ethnographically illiterate."
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Wed, May 16, 2012 - 8:11 AM<I am not saying it was the right decision, and I am not saying he should not have come out sooner in support, but I am saying that there are reasons beyond purely political considerations. In particular being that Obama's generation has come around slower than the younger generation to this issue, but coming around they are.>
i'm not sure how you go from support for gay marriage to opposition without it being for purely political considerations, especially since his opposition came around the time he had to start appealing to a significantly larger cross-section of the population. considering he attended harvard law school, he had to have known a good number of gay men and women so i don't really buy the idea that he suddenly saw the light because of his daughters' friends' parents. plenty of his staff members, according to him have been in stable, loving relationships and, again, i note his harvard tenure.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Dude this is so Gay
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 12:17 AM........I guess Gay people should be happy.
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 8:41 AM -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 9:06 AM
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 1:33 PMyou know this is probably not a popular thing to say with liberals, but I got to say i start to see the religious nut side to this. Isn't getting married in a church kind of a religious thing ? Shouldn't religious people be allowed to make there own rules about how marriage works in there churchs, they are supposed to be there church's after all arnt they ? If you dont like there rules, why not get a civil marriage ?
Personally if i was gay, and i thought a church was anti gay, why would i even want that church to sanction or bless my marriage ? Why wouldn't i get a civil marriage ?
It just strikes me that as much as gays should get mad when religious people preach to them about how there lifestyle should be, then arnt some Christians allowed to define how they want there churchs to function without the state or gays forcing on them laws about how they should operate.
Thats if im understanding this debate right, its about Church marriages isnt it ? Of course gays should get full rights in civil marriages and all full rights under the law.
All that being said i think Chruchs shouldn't be allowed to be openly anti gay, just as there are laws against racism.
It just seems a little odd to me if you think of Christianity as some kind of club that gays would demand to be let in if the people in that club dont want them in. If it was me id say sod you if your not going to make me feel welcome i dont want your bloody church.
This is kind of what i have been saying about Islam, to me true tolerance is allowing others to live there lifestyle even if you dont like it. Muslims may not like woman who wear biknis on a beach, and secular people may not like woman wearing the berka on the beach, but if you ask me EITHER of these people is being intolerant if they demand the other cant do as they choose.
I honestly believe this is what made Obama think hard about it, though he had to keep his questions and thoughts close to his chest so as not to offend gays or liberals. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 1:47 PMthere are civil unions, and there are marriages. you can get married at a courthouse. you can get married at a church.
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 1:47 PMplease don't start understanding something that doesn't make any sense. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 10:24 PMLOL, that is a good way to put it.
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 1:56 PMThey're not demanding to force churches to marry them. However there are plenty of churches that would do just that. They are also not trying to stop religious marriages from taking place. There are plenty of religious gays in the world, and there are plenty of atheist gays. Demanding their equal rights under the Constitution is completely understandable, and Obama defended their right to get married back in 1996, and flip flopped for 16 years, until 2012, and now he isn't even recognizing their Constitutional right, he is saying that states should be able to decide whether they want to deny them their Constitutional rights or not, which is explicitly against the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. And the religious argument against gays is against the 1st Amendment.
The definition of marriage that many Christians are taking nowadays isn't even in-line with what the Church used to practice. anthropologist.livejournal.com/13...tml -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 10:21 PMDid Obama actually put forth a full throated defense of gay marriage in 1996? I was under the impression that he checked off a box on a form in support of gay marriage, a form Obama says was actually filled out by a staffer. If he did put forth a full throated defense of gay marriage in 1996 I would like to see your source. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 11:18 PM -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 11:34 PMThat is the same questionaire I was speaking of. Are you saying no such full throated defense of gay marriage exists outside the bounds of this one questionaire? -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 1:39 AMI'm saying that I think he says things and does things to influence public opinion so that statement back then and the others in between and the one now are all designed to pander to different crowds. He is a liar, fraud, and war criminal, like Bush.
sites.google.com/site/afgh...ngenocide/
Bring the troops home. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 1:41 AM -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 1:17 PMThat is the very same questionaire.
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 1:12 PMIt was a questionaire in 96, hardly a full throated defense of gay marriage. In particular if a staffer did indeed fill it out. I have seen no such statements beyond this one questionaire. If you have any actual statements beyond this quesionaire I would llike to see them.
-
-
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 8:34 PMwww.mediaite.com/online/fi...-marriage/
i mean, seriously, jeff. i posted about this on wednesday. did you not read my post? -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 8:58 PMI mean seriously Gerbil, I don't read every link you post. And as I said, "IF a staffer did indeed fill it out", which means I was not putting for the idea as a fact, primarily becaused I had not yet had a chance to research the claim further. The fact still remains that it was a questionaire in 96 and hardly a full throated defense of gay marriage. Were civil unions even presented as an option in 1996? I think for a time Obama seen that as a viable option. But clearly he was a bit wishy washy about the issue in 1996, as were many people who have had their views evolve. 27% of Americans supported gay marriage in 1996, 53% in 2012. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Mon, May 14, 2012 - 8:48 AMuspolitics.tribe.net/thread/...183d1153
you might want to hold back on calling people uninformed or misinformed. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Mon, May 14, 2012 - 2:30 PMI was not calling anyone either uniformed or misinformed in relation to this subject, so i am unsure as to what your specific beef is. In addition, I did not put forth the information as a fact, hence the reason I used the word "if", I clearly left the option open that Obama may well have filled out the form. Color me confused, but you are seemingly arguing against nothing here. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Wed, May 16, 2012 - 7:55 AMuspolitics.tribe.net/thread/...be3c5e13
<That is factually incorrect Gerbil, you are misinformed.>
lol, way to obfuscate. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Wed, May 16, 2012 - 9:57 AMI have walking pneumoniaand am on heavy meds, excuse my error.
-
-
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Mon, May 14, 2012 - 8:53 AMit was a defense of gay marriage. it hardly matters whether it was "full throated" or not. he was for gay marriage in 1996 before he was against it up until last wednesday. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Mon, May 14, 2012 - 2:36 PM<<he was for gay marriage in 1996 before he was against it up until last wednesday.
Color me confused again, but I just acknowledged that. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Wed, May 16, 2012 - 8:17 AMbut since it was not "full-throated", then it doesn't mean as much?
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 1:41 AM< Demanding their equal rights under the Constitution is completely understandable>
Im still a bit unclear on what this is about, sorry i haven't read much on this and you guys have so you could probably save me a bit time. Are they demanding full Civil rights to marriage In every state ? If thats it I fully support them.
Or are they demanding that ALL churches HAVE to marry them. To me thats a bit different and i have questions about whether churches should be forced to do that if they dont want to. I am aware that some churches and priests are fine with homosexuality, indeed they are some priests who are gay arnt there.
But to me religious churches should have the right to decide. Not so state civil marriages, that's different to me, because that is a national state system that should be completely impartial and not biased to gays, and gays married should also get full marriage rights by law, with tax, or whatever.
You know there is similar debate being going on in the UK at the moment but i haven't been following that much recently. Been watching whats going on in the Euro and Greece much more. You guys really want to take notice of that, check out my recent thread on that. Financial companies are now putting Greece at defaulting at 75%, and if its going to happen its probably going to happen sometime over this summer. If that happens its going to be as big as the 2008 crash. I think many in America do not realize how big that will be.
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 1:58 AM"Or are they demanding that ALL churches HAVE to marry them"
No, not at all. Marriage is a legal thing, but it can be a religious thing, too. They just want their legal rights. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 2:01 AMGays have had their spouses deported. It shouldn't be like that. It's legal in Washington, D.C., the nation's capital, but not everywhere else in the U.S. and that is unconstitutional. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 2:02 AMGay marriage is legal in Washington, D.C. is what I meant. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 2:05 AMAnd honestly you shouldn't just think about this as "church" you realize there are plenty of religions in the U.S., right? Gay people can be of other religions than Christian. Obviously. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 2:08 AM"But to me religious churches should have the right to decide."
I posted a link about how gay marriage was a Christian rite in the past. Perhaps these churches could do a little homework. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 3:30 AM<I posted a link about how gay marriage was a Christian rite in the past. Perhaps these churches could do a little homework.>
Is a "union" the same as a "marriage"?
Or did someone not do their homework? -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 5:38 AM'These church rites had all the symbols of a heterosexual marriage: the whole community gathered in a church, a blessing of the couple before the altar was conducted with their right hands joined, holy vows were exchanged, a priest officiatied in the taking of the Eucharist and a wedding feast for the guests was celebrated afterwards. These elements all appear in contemporary illustrations of the holy union of the Byzantine Warrior-Emperor, Basil the First (867-886 CE) and his companion John.'
Someone didn't do their homework, and that person is you.
anthropologist.livejournal.com/13...tml -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 10:08 AM<Someone didn't do their homework, and that person is you.>
This statement is false. I have done my homework. ;)
Have you done your homework?
Is it your position that a same-sex "union" is the same as a heterosexual "marriage"? -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Mon, May 14, 2012 - 2:30 AMA civil union is not a same sex marriage but the Christian church in its past had a rite for marrying gay people and so my point was if the modern churches are denying that rite to their flock then maybe they should do their homework. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Mon, May 14, 2012 - 3:16 AM<the Christian church in its past had a rite for marrying gay people and so my point was if the modern churches are denying that rite to their flock then maybe they should do their homework.>
Your premise is false.
The Adelphopoiia rite is a rite for making spiritual brothers. It is not a gay marriage rite.
The notion that only homosexual males are committed to love each other is false.
Your point fails.
It is not historically inconsistent for a Christian to support same sex "unions", but not same sex "marriage".
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 10:06 PM<<you know this is probably not a popular thing to say with liberals, but I got to say i start to see the religious nut side to this. Isn't getting married in a church kind of a religious thing ? Shouldn't religious people be allowed to make there own rules about how marriage works in there churchs, they are supposed to be there church's after all arnt they ? If you dont like there rules, why not get a civil marriage ?
I think "marriage", "civil marriage" and "civil unions". Gay couples in most states can't currently get a "civil marriage". Legalizing
same sex marriages does not force churches to permform gay marriages, the churches can still make their own rules in that regard. Not all marriages are performed in churches, mine certainly was not and it was outdoors and officiated by a Pagan priestess. Ultimately the LGBT community is asking for the same right to a legal marriage as straight couples, it does not then follow that religious conservatives would be forced to perform gay marriages. A civil marriage performed by a justice of the peace is still a marriage, one that most gay couples currently are disallowed from getting. A civil union is another thing entirely, it gives the same rights as a marriage but is not called a "marriage".The reason this is offensive is that it is much akin to the separate but supposedly equal rules that segregated whites from blacks in the US. Gay couples have every right to to be legally "married" as straight couples. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 2:00 AM<Gay couples in most states can't currently get a "civil marriage". Legalizing
same sex marriages does not force churches to permform gay marriages, the churches can still make their own rules in that regard. >
thanks for the clarification Jeff ! Yeah sure i didnt mean civil union but Civil Marriage. Why i was getting confused is the debate about this going on in the UK is totally different, here all civil marriages are already legal, they have been for about 20 years i think it was, but there debating whether churches should have to make gay marriages whether they want to or not.
Of course i think gays should be legally allowed to marry. Not surprising though its meeting resistance with parts of America, knowing how deeply Conservative SOME of America is. Thinking of it though when this eventually does go through it will be a statement about America that it is more liberal than conservative and will be a landmark victory for Liberals in American even if there not gay for that reason. Of course gays deserve to be able to live there life without a society relegating them to sub human rights in a blatantly judgmental way.
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 10:16 PM
Again, just to emphasize, marriage equality in the US is not about getting married in a church, churces are still allowed to make their own rules. This will not force churches or religious people to perform or approve of gay marriage. This is about legalizing gay couples ability to get married period, something that is not currently legal in most US states. Ultimately legalizing gay marriage does not affect the churches one iota, they see it as an attack on marriage because they think their version of God has the market cornered on the term "marriage".
In addition, our constitution protects the rights of free speech for all, so Churches are actually protected in their anti-gay speech if they so choose, as are racists being that racist language is also protected by our constitution. Free speech does not just mean speech we agree with.
Hope this clears things up. :)
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sat, May 12, 2012 - 10:48 PMElo, this has nothing to do with what churches can do. I'm not aware of anyone arguing that churches should be forced to marry gay couples. The issue was whether the STATE should recognize gay marriages. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 2:01 AMthanks Ron, Jeff just clarified that for me too, there has been a very different debate going on in the UK about churches having gay marriages, civil marriage here is already totally legal. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 2:14 AMsorry i am obviously hopelessly uniformed on this issue, but this is the status in the UK --
<Same-sex marriage is currently prohibited although since 2005, same-sex couples are allowed to enter into civil partnerships, a separate union which provides the legal consequences of marriage. In 2006 the High Court rejected a legal bid by a British lesbian couple who had married in Canada to have their union recognised as a marriage in the UK and not as a civil partnership. In February 2011 the UK government expressed its intention to begin a consultation to allow both religious same-sex ceremonies and civil marriage for same-sex couples in England and Wales.[134] In September 2011, the Government announced its intention to introduce same-sex civil marriage by the next general election.[135]>
Im surprised, i thought it had been legal for awhile, but it must have been civil partnerships, which is not quite the same thing.
About time the world got out of the medieval ages if you ask me. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 2:33 AMgo read the 1st amendment and 14th amendment and then the preamble to the constitution to see why we even have a/the constitution of the usa and then i think you will understand more why obama declaring that gay marriage should be up to the states is not granting gays the full rights of the constitution.
section one of 14th amendment: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
preamble: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
it's the supreme law
About the 1st amendment: The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 1:33 PMthis like so many other issues is symbolic of the growing split in America between liberalism and conservatism, let and right, America is going through historic changes right now and Obama is a pragmatic centrist with a realists sense of idealism.
America on so may issues now hands by a thread with heavy weights on both the left and the right, when one side pulls it down its going to start moving at real speed, but right now the battle either at or building to climax level.
When it falls to the side of liberalism and the left though, you watch Obama ride that wave down like a Hawaiian surfer with a grin on his face.
That is what him coming on side with this and the Buffet rule recently etc is about.
its him trying to gently tip the scales to the left, and to liberalism, but he will not push, he is no FDR and doesn't want to be, he wants the People and America to lead, not himself.
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 1:37 PM<hands by a thread>
hangs, but the hanging man could turn in the jumping man soon enough !
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 1:34 PM<<go read the 1st amendment and 14th amendment and then the preamble to the constitution to see why we even have a/the constitution of the usa and then i think you will understand more why obama declaring that gay marriage should be up to the states is not granting gays the full rights of the constitution.
Obama in fact considers DOMA to be unconstitutional. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Mon, May 14, 2012 - 2:32 AMyes obama thinks a federal amendment banning gay marriage is unconstitutional, but not if states decide to ban it. yet as maddow said, that's the thing about rights, they're not supposed to be voted on. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Mon, May 14, 2012 - 7:30 AMI agree with you regarding this being a right, but federalizing the issue is also a double edged sword for the reasons I pointed out. Legitimizing a federal solution could go against the cause thereby allowing a possible Republican President to work against this progression. And while some states are progressing on the issue, other states are reflexively regressing, and this ultimately will create a situation under the equal protection clause that will come to a head in the courts. The American public is progressing on this issue very quickly as well, which will create added pressure as it is forced to a head. I think this is going to be solved in the courts, most likely the supreme court. EvenWolfson explains it better than I on Hardball.
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/303669.../#47378649
-
-
-
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 1:27 PMNo worries Elo, Americans themselves don't know shit about these kinds of mciro issues in other countries. You are further along in understanding our system then most Americans are in understanding the system of even our closest neighbor to the north, Canada....lol. -
-
Re: Obama Endorses Gay Marriage
Sun, May 13, 2012 - 1:35 PMive got to say Im quite fascinated by the better side of America, many people around the world would admit so too. We will see the better side of America blossom one way or the other in the near future, im reasonably sure about that.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Barack Obama’s Bullshit Gay Marriage Announcement
Mon, May 14, 2012 - 2:53 AMnice
People can get married many ways, a church is just one way religious people do it. One can get married by even a captain of a boat. My friend did this in Louisiana and got married on a riverboat.