Obama backs gay marriage

[agzg]

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

I'm sorry, but I'm not impressed. He should have addressed the topic years ago, not waited until Biden tested the waters for him. It makes me sad that people are thanking him for saying something he should have said 3 years ago when he was all about change. Not to mention, his words hold no water (like most politicians) as he rarely follows through on them.

No matter who we elect, I don't think that same sex marriage will be legalized in the next four years. NC's decision just reinforced that. In the meantime, I'll continue to unfollow on Twitter and defriend on FB since these issues really let you know who thinks what. I'm Alabama born and bred and have plenty of friends who don't want to see same sex marriage legalized. I genuinely don't get it, but I'm used to it and can respect their right to an opinion when it isn't aggressive or offensive. The others I just ignore.

Here's my take: Sanctity of marriage? Kim Kardashian. Britney Spears. Historical context...marriage used to be a matter of political and financial advantages (and still is, sometimes). Why can't committed couples have a legal document that gives them the same rights Kim and that guy had? If churches don't want to hold religious marriage ceremonies for same sex couples, that's fine. But LEGALLY this country supports equality and the separation of church and state. And lastly, I was brought up in a Christian household in Alabama and went to church every Sunday until I left for college. It's amazing to me how much of what Jesus said gets ignored...namely the second half of The Great Commandment. I'm not religious, but I learned my bible verses dutifully, and personally I think Jesus had the right idea...just be A NICE PERSON. TO EVERYONE.

Originally Posted by FSUZeta

Being "personally"(referring to Obama-not you) for something doesn't change the legislation and that is what needs to happen.

The decision to not defend DOMA (even though Congress is trying to force them to) came at least a year ago. Don't act like DADT hasn't been repealed. These things take time and considering the President can't just decree the laws, they've done a good job of setting up the groundwork for the courts to slam down DOMA and all of these state constitutional amendments. If they don't do that, I'll be very disappointed.

[Alumiyum]

Originally Posted by agzg

The decision to not defend DOMA (even though Congress is trying to force them to) came at least a year ago. Don't act like DADT hasn't been repealed. These things take time and considering the President can't just decree the laws, they've done a good job of setting up the groundwork for the courts to slam down DOMA and all of these state constitutional amendments. If they don't do that, I'll be very disappointed.

If the President could just decree things, we'd really be in trouble. However, in my mind he still gets no credit for being "for" gay marriage at this point in the game. The President can't magically pass laws, but he CAN try to push legislation along.

I was never a fan to begin with, and this doesn't help. I might have been swayed had this come up in the first year or so of his term, or if he would follow through on it and actively push for equal rights.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by LAblondeGPhi

Exactly. And what about quickie Vegas weddings?

Yea, but what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.. So it doesn't really count :P

I'm actually heading out there tomorrow.. I'm hoping I don't return with a ring on my finger!

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

Here's my take: Sanctity of marriage? Kim Kardashian. Britney Spears.

One of my friends posted this on Facebook earlier:

"Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britany Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be DESTROYED!"

I chuckled.

[DrPhil]

Presidents can't please everyone. People will complain if they make a statement and people will complain if they do not make a statement (as people were complaining days before he made this statement).

President Obama's statement of support is safe enough to receive more support from those who agree with him without losing support from some of those who disagree with him. Those who disagree with him know that politicians have all sorts of personal opinions that may or may not impact legislation.

[Leslie Anne]

Originally Posted by FSUZeta

Being "personally"(referring to Obama-not you) for something doesn't change the legislation and that is what needs to happen.

I didn't suggest that legislation has been passed.

[AlphaFrog]

This just cracked me up:

[pshsx1]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

This just cracked me up:

My life just fucking ended.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

If the President could just decree things, we'd really be in trouble. However, in my mind he still gets no credit for being "for" gay marriage at this point in the game. The President can't magically pass laws, but he CAN try to push legislation along.

I was never a fan to begin with, and this doesn't help. I might have been swayed had this come up in the first year or so of his term, or if he would follow through on it and actively push for equal rights.

It's not as if same sex couples can get married today, everywhere in the country. But I do think he does deserve credit for being the first sitting President to say it at all, at any point. As wishy washy as people like to believe he is, to make such a statement the day after North Carolina, where his party's convention will be this summer, puts a ban on same sex marriage into an amendment in their constitution takes some guts and good political planning, if it helps to energize his base and swing things his way.

Also, I do think directing the DOJ to not defend DOMA and making a strong case for repealing DADT has brought him and his administration closer than anyone's ever gotten toward protecting and re-instating the human rights of the LGBT community. And, again, it's laid a very good groundwork for either

A: the Supreme Court to strike down DOMA and the state constitutional amendments when they finally agree to hear the cases OR
B: people to be mighty pissed of the Supreme Court passes on the chance or upholds DOMA or the state constitutional amendments.

Either way you look at it, though, it's not as if he and his administration haven't been pushing for equal rights. It's just that the ball is squarely in the Supreme Court's... well... court.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

The President can't magically pass laws, but he CAN try to push legislation along.

Not really, at least not on this subject. Marriage is generally considered a matter for states, not the federal government, to legislate in, so he's not really in a position to push legislation. Outside the federal DOMA, which he has decided not to defend, and maybe things like the tax code, he mainly just has a bully pulpit.

[VandalSquirrel]

I was and am, so pleased that he choose to make a public statement that he believes in equality and human rights for the people of the country he leads. Even if this hurts his re-election campaign and in January of 2013 someone else is sworn into office, I'm happy that it was said.

I've still yet to hear any argument against marriage equality that doesn't involve religion or ignorance against letting two consenting, non-related, unmarried adults join their lives together

I'm also still enjoying this tumblr http://whenobamaendorsed.tumblr.com/




Disclaimer: I say marriage equality instead of gay marriage since I want to include all the opposite sex couples who may have a civil joining and not a religious one, and trans people who may not be legally allowed to have paperwork to match who they are and also can't get officially hitched.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

I love you, Dee. That was a well thought out, measured response. I would have just called him an idiot!

I prefer to let them display their own ignorance to the world. His response to my last post was:

I do take the Bible literally. It is also true that New Testament provides a new covenant with the people that many of the old laws do not neccessarily apply. We do not dare judge, but knowing right from wrong is and should be guided by Biblical teachings. We all sin and yet as Christians, we should not become hung up on sin because that is not the purpose of Christ setting us free. "For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery" Gal 5:1. I'm not good at quoting scripture and do not ever try to impress others with my "lack of" knowledge. Being free applies to man's and God's law. Being free does not mean we avoid either.

I am not responding because I know there's no point because it is clear he is contradicting himself in his own post. I take it literally, but many of the old laws do not necessarily apply.. that says it all. "I pick and choose which rules to follow but other people need to follow my rules"

[Senusret I]

Originally Posted by Alumiyum

I'm sorry, but I'm not impressed. He should have addressed the topic years ago, not waited until Biden tested the waters for him. It makes me sad that people are thanking him for saying something he should have said 3 years ago when he was all about change. Not to mention, his words hold no water (like most politicians) as he rarely follows through on them.

I agree.

This is what I said yesterday on facebook and a lot of people told me I ought to be grateful.

I kindly told them I didn't need to be grateful for any straight person's privilege.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by AGDee

I prefer to let them display their own ignorance to the world. His response to my last post was:

I do take the Bible literally. It is also true that New Testament provides a new covenant with the people that many of the old laws do not neccessarily apply. We do not dare judge, but knowing right from wrong is and should be guided by Biblical teachings. We all sin and yet as Christians, we should not become hung up on sin because that is not the purpose of Christ setting us free. "For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery" Gal 5:1. I'm not good at quoting scripture and do not ever try to impress others with my "lack of" knowledge. Being free applies to man's and God's law. Being free does not mean we avoid either.

I am not responding because I know there's no point because it is clear he is contradicting himself in his own post. I take it literally, but many of the old laws do not necessarily apply.. that says it all. "I pick and choose which rules to follow but other people need to follow my rules"

SMH. Not only that, he said right there that "we do not dare judge..." Ummm.

As to the timing of Obama's announcement, no one needs to be grateful. It is self serving, but everything a politician does is. Obviously he had these opinions for awhile since he would no longer defend DOMA, but politics are politics. No sitting president is going to come out and say something that "inflammatory" without testing the waters first. Biden and the cabinet members said their piece without backlash, so the President got to plan his entrance strategically on the morning after NC made an ass of itself.

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by fina

It is token support to try and get support from the gay community. If Obama really supported gay marriage then where is the legislation to support gay marriage?

What is the difference between a President who supports gay marriage and a President who does not support gay marriage if neither support any legislation on gay marriage?

Psst...8th Grade Civics lesson: The President is part of the Executive branch and is not responsible for originating LEGISLATION. That would be the Legislative branch...aka Congress.

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by fina

Thanks for stating the obvious.

Why is Obamacare called Obamacare? Obama had nothing to do with it, right?

What is the point Obama commenting on gay marriage or ANY legislative issue for that matter? Maybe Obama failed 8th grade civics.

Obamacare was rammed through a still Dem-majority congress. He's not going to fight like that for gay marriage for several reasons: He no longer has a Dem-majority Congress. Gays generally already supported him, but he's lost some supporters who were against gay marriages. Marriage is a state not a federal issue. Pick one.

It would be hilarious if Obama failed civics.