1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

On gay marriage, Obama’s critics and supporters alike think he may shift again

Discussion in 'Current Events, World News, & LGBT News' started by Dan82, May 24, 2012.

  1. Dan82

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chicago IL
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ge-his-views/2012/05/23/gJQA7WuXlU_story.html


     
  2. Revan

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Messages:
    7,850
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    Canada
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Ok for a second I thought this article was going to say that he'd back out. But no this article is better lol.
     
  3. RedState

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The Southeastern Conference
    No..No..No..

    Once again..as I have stated before..I DESPISE Obama's positions...but I will defend him when I think he is correct...and in this circumstance he is (at least for now)...this is a States rights issue.Period.
     
  4. Thyker

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    A few people
    This is what I thought as well.

    I personally believe, though, that if this is going to happen anytime soon, it needs to be done through the federal government. It will take years for all states to approve of it and even then may try to back out.
     
  5. Afraida

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Colorado
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Questioning
    I really hate how gay marriage is still an issue, because it's not an issue. It's a non-issue. There's no victim if two men or two women marry.
     
  6. Linthras

    Linthras Guest

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    2,140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Leeuwarden (FR), the Netherlands
    ^This^ If Obama would change position that would be political suicide, so I highly doubt that. More so since he seems sincere in his support.
     
  7. Damnit. I fail to see how this is a states rights issue. I hate to even get into this or pull this card, but why are we leaving civil rights up to a vote among states?

    Fact - Women nationwide got the right to vote via a Constitutional Amendment. States took action before hand, but the Federal Government realized citizens were being denied rights and took action

    In relation to African-American rights

    Fact - Some of the major steps made in ensuring fair treatment of African Americans were laws passed by the United States Congress (Civil Rights Act of 1964, Voting Rights Act of 1965). If left up to the states, who's to say where we'd be.

    I'm not calling you a racist, or a sexist, or misogynistic. I'm just saying it's not always best if everything is left up to the States. I'm also not saying everything should be decided by the Federal Government, but there should be a middle ground, and LGBT rights shouldn't be voted on by states, nor should it be voted on by people at all. It should just be, because it's the right thing to do. I'm sure you'll have something to say, so bring it on. I guess I'm in the mood for a debate.

    ---------- Post added 24th May 2012 at 11:06 PM ----------

    Exactly!!! It should just be. It hurts no one. Countries that have legalized same-sex marriage didn't fall into the ocean, and it didn't destroy society.
     
  8. Chip

    Board Member Admin Team Advisor Full Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2008
    Messages:
    16,551
    Likes Received:
    4,750
    Location:
    northern CA
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    If you can answer this respectfully, without ripping on Obama or any of us Deep Blue thinkers, I'm interested to hear a sensible argument why something that sounds to me like a civil rights issue should be left to the state.

    When the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed, there were the exact same arguments, from the same political party, that it was a state rights issue. It would seem to me that there really isn't much of an argument in favor of allowing states to continue to discriminate against people who choose to enter same-sex relationships.

    I guess I could see the "fewer regulations is better" argument but this seems like something that's pretty fundamental, and if individual states need to have the force of federal law to remind them of this, I don't see where the harm comes in.
     
  9. RemyLeBeau

    RemyLeBeau Guest

    But letting gays marry will ruin the purity of Britney Spears's 55 hour heterosexual marriage!!! Society would break apart!

    All sarcasm aside, I'm glad he's on our side. It kinda sucks growing up knowing that there's a possibility you won't be allowed to get married to the person you love because she's a lady. As Afraida said, there really IS no issue, and I don't understand why people can just get along.

    But I'm young and know nothing about politics...
     
  10. RedState

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The Southeastern Conference
    >>>Without ripping Obama
    Huh???
    I'm supporting his position..how could I be ripping him in this circumstance.

    Goddamn, I just can't fucking win here.

    I blast the president and I'm a horrible gay.

    I support the president, and I'm going to rip him.

    Tell me exactly where in the US Constitution it says anything about regulating marriage.

    When did people start applying to Washington for a marriage license?

    The 10th Amendment clearly states that powers not granted by the federal government and not prohibited to the states will be left up to the States.

    I simply cannot understand why that is so difficult for some of you people to understand. That has been my argument against a federal marriage amendment all along. The Constitution is not a document of convenience...we may argue against the reasoning of some of it's guidelines, but things are there for a reason
     
    #10 RedState, May 26, 2012
    Last edited: May 26, 2012
  11. Chip

    Board Member Admin Team Advisor Full Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2008
    Messages:
    16,551
    Likes Received:
    4,750
    Location:
    northern CA
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Michael, I wasn't trying to bait or insult you. I was simply saying... you often take opportunities to take swipes at Obama (just like I do at Romney) and I was saying "Let's talk about the issue, not take pot shots."

    Now... onto the actual topic: The Constitution also doesn't say anything about discrimination against black (or other non-caucasian) people either, but the federal government did enact various laws, or allow Supreme Court rulings to stand, to provide equal protection to people of color.

    The most strikingly similar issue I can think of is the miscegenation laws that were prevalent prior to the 1970s. I suspect that, in 2012, all but the most bigoted Americans would support the rights of people of different races to marry, and yet this isn't guaranteed by the Constitution, and was illegal in a number of states even in the late 60s. It wasn't until the Feds stepped in and (I believe it was a Supreme Court decision) ruled miscegenation laws to be unconstitutional that interracial marriage became legal in all 50 states. Gay marriage is really the same issue, and most Constitutional scholars agree that the arguments made by the opponents of Prop 8 were pretty irrefutable.

    I'm not at all convinced we need a constitutional amendment, but I do think we need Federal precedent so that the backwater states that are still full of bigots will be forced to be decent human beings, in the same way that the Civil Rights Act and striking of miscegenation laws forced those states to (for the most part, at least) treat people of color equally with caucasian people.
     
  12. RedState

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The Southeastern Conference
    Chip..
    You know that I have a lot of respect for you...and I know that you don't do the whole bait and insult thing...so no worries :slight_smile: And apologies if my post came off as such.

    I have said many times before that my personal belief is that states should allow civil unions, or whatever they want to call them...marriage is something that is done by the Church. Yes I know everyone here disagrees with me on that, but that is just what I believe.

    I don't even think the State should have anything to do with straight marriage...but that's another discussion.

    We all have our beliefs..but I'm a complete nerd when it comes to following the Constitution..and I think this is one of those issues
     
  13. Revan

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Messages:
    7,850
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    Canada
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    ^ I do so love when people think marriage is a religious institution. When in truth it wasn't even done BY the Church or controlled by it until bishop Ignatius of Antioch actually decided to make it done by the Church sometime around 325 CE. And prior to the creation of Christianity, marriage was still present without being needed "by the Church". So honestly, while I understand your reasoning for allowing the States to decide for themselves, I fail to see your reasoning for it being done by the Church.
     
  14. RedState

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The Southeastern Conference
    Well, you know Revan, blacks were slaves in 1820..but that's not how it is now.

    Prior to Christianity, Zeus and Apollo roamed the earth as well...but we don't really hold on to that now either do we?

    Point being, you can bring up ancient history all you want, the fact of the matter is that marriage is..in modern times..carried on by the Church.

    Next.
     
  15. Revan

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Messages:
    7,850
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    Canada
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Well, they'd like to think that, but it isn't :slight_smile:. After all, don't recall you having to get a marriage license at a Church, just the state. All the church is good for is a ceremony, and "being blessed under God", to that all I say is,

    [​IMG]
     
  16. RedState

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The Southeastern Conference
    And, you would recall me saying that I don't think the State should have anything to do with marriage...so your point is?

    Thought so.

    Next.
     
  17. Revan

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Messages:
    7,850
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    Canada
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Moving on. I do hope Obama does change his mind, it would do the States a lot of good I think in this issue.

    And yes you did say that about the States, but none the less the State and or Federal Government should issue licenses, it should not be under any control of the church except to perform a ceremony.
     
  18. RedState

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The Southeastern Conference
    Ok...so I just want to get clarification...is Obama a homophobe for being for gay marriage..then against it..then for it, but only wanting the states to decide it.

    I mean, I know he shits marble for some of you people, but I'm just curious of your opinion on this considering how some of you like to throw that term around so freely..I guess he's a part time homophobe..or a homophobe with a pass because he's well..you know..Hawaiian?
     
    #18 RedState, May 26, 2012
    Last edited: May 26, 2012
  19. ArcaneVerse

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Messages:
    529
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    That is one of the most ridiculous arguments i have ever heard.
     
  20. RedState

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The Southeastern Conference
    Well, you being from Australia, please give me a lecture about our US Constitution...I'm dying to hear it.