Obama endorses gay marriage.
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 01:20:22 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Obama endorses gay marriage.
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Author Topic: Obama endorses gay marriage.  (Read 7168 times)
Oakvale
oakvale
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,827
Ukraine
Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: May 09, 2012, 04:55:55 PM »


Of course he doesn't.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,420
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: May 09, 2012, 04:57:25 PM »

Good. This is perhaps the most clear-cut, "black and white" issue to me.

It's simple: Gays should have all the rights that straights have. They don't currently.

Solution: Give them those rights legally.
Logged
NY Jew
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 538


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: May 09, 2012, 05:02:07 PM »

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/05/will-obama-finally-endorse-gay-marriage-abc-news/52110/

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course, polls showed that large majorities of Americans thought Obama support gay marriage anyway, so I doubt the political impact's as major as some were expecting - either positive or negative. Smiley
how come every single time it came to a vote it lost
Logged
NY Jew
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 538


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: May 09, 2012, 05:07:05 PM »

Good. This is perhaps the most clear-cut, "black and white" issue to me.

It's simple: Gays should have all the rights that straights have. They don't currently.

Solution: Give them those rights legally.
yes they do, any gay can get married to a member of the opposite sex even in North Carolina.

gays obviously went to the Joseph Goebbels school of propaganda "if you repeat a lie often enough idiots will believe you".
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: May 09, 2012, 05:07:15 PM »

how come every single time it came to a vote it lost

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?fips=4&year=2006&f=0&off=50&elect=0
Logged
Oakvale
oakvale
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,827
Ukraine
Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: May 09, 2012, 05:09:00 PM »

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/05/will-obama-finally-endorse-gay-marriage-abc-news/52110/

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course, polls showed that large majorities of Americans thought Obama support gay marriage anyway, so I doubt the political impact's as major as some were expecting - either positive or negative. Smiley
how come every single time it came to a vote it lost

That's not true, of course, but you knew that. Smiley

It's also not my point - the kind of people who turn out to vote on a gay marriage amendment are inherently going to be more conservative (and Republican) than those who turn out in a Presidential election - I doubt this is going to change many votes.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: May 09, 2012, 05:09:52 PM »

Good. This is perhaps the most clear-cut, "black and white" issue to me.

It's simple: Gays should have all the rights that straights have. They don't currently.

Solution: Give them those rights legally.
yes they do, any gay can get married to a member of the opposite sex even in North Carolina.

gays obviously went to the Joseph Goebbels school of propaganda "if you repeat a lie often enough idiots will believe you".

Oh shut up.
Logged
Oakvale
oakvale
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,827
Ukraine
Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: May 09, 2012, 05:10:54 PM »

Good. This is perhaps the most clear-cut, "black and white" issue to me.

It's simple: Gays should have all the rights that straights have. They don't currently.

Solution: Give them those rights legally.
yes they do, any gay can get married to a member of the opposite sex even in North Carolina.

Best post ever!

Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: May 09, 2012, 05:12:33 PM »

Good. This is perhaps the most clear-cut, "black and white" issue to me.

It's simple: Gays should have all the rights that straights have. They don't currently.

Solution: Give them those rights legally.
yes they do, any gay can get married to a member of the opposite sex even in North Carolina.

gays obviously went to the Joseph Goebbels school of propaganda "if you repeat a lie often enough idiots will believe you".

Oh shut up.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: May 09, 2012, 05:16:36 PM »

I'm very glad he's finally said so publicly. For reasons BK stated in the thread about this on the 2012 board, I don't think this will be as damaging as some might think. I'm glad I have something to feel good about, with Obama, for a change.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: May 09, 2012, 05:26:22 PM »

A referendum banning gay marriage failed in Idaho in 1994 as well, though that one was certainly much further reaching in it's anti-gay rhetoric than any of its more modern cousins.

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?fips=16&year=1994&f=0&off=61&elect=0
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,235
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: May 09, 2012, 05:48:46 PM »

Today's headlines:

President Obama endorses gay marriage in a move his advisers call "not political."

Also in the news: Rick Santorum says he is "not gay."
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,420
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: May 09, 2012, 05:51:05 PM »

As I said in another thread...

This may be Santorum's Republican Party. It sure as hell ain't Santorum's America. And Romney is in between a rock and a hard place between moderately conservative Independents and the rabid religious right (aka much of the GOP electorate).
Logged
Purch
Rookie
**
Posts: 196


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: May 09, 2012, 06:22:16 PM »

Good. This is perhaps the most clear-cut, "black and white" issue to me.

It's simple: Gays should have all the rights that straights have. They don't currently.

Solution: Give them those rights legally.
yes they do, any gay can get married to a member of the opposite sex even in North Carolina.

gays obviously went to the Joseph Goebbels school of propaganda "if you repeat a lie often enough idiots will believe you".

Even though I'm pro gay marriage there is some truth to the statement you made. Personally I think gay rights is a struggle over the need to re-define marriage ( Which I feel the traditional man and women only thing is outdated). Personally when I think of a Civil rights issue I thinnk of an issue in which the majority of the people have a right whiles a minority is denied these rights, Think African American's not being allowed to vote whiles white Americans were. However no man in America(Well before states voted on it) black/white/Hispanic/Asian had the right to marry someone of their own sex so I don't really see how it's defined as a civil rights. If it was a civil rights issue I feel someone(The majority) would have to have the rights to marry their own sex and that majority would have to be denying a minority that same right but that's not the case.

Anyhow we're in 2012 and we need to redefine marrige, If Gay couples wanna be miserable like half the people who get married why not?
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,867
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: May 09, 2012, 06:26:23 PM »
« Edited: May 09, 2012, 06:28:48 PM by Alcon »

Even though I'm pro gay marriage there is some truth to the statement you made. Personally I think gay rights is a struggle over the need to re-define marriage ( Which I feel the traditional man and women only thing is outdated). Personally when I think of a Civil rights issue I thinnk of an issue in which the majority of the people have a right whiles a minority is denied these rights, Think African American's not being allowed to vote whiles white Americans were. However no man in America(Well before states voted on it) black/white/Hispanic/Asian had the right to marry someone of their own sex so I don't really see how it's defined as a civil rights. If it was a civil rights issue I feel someone(The majority) would have to have the rights to marry their own sex and that majority would have to be denying a minority that same right but that's not the case.

Anyhow we're in 2012 and we need to redefine marrige, If Gay couples wanna be miserable like half the people who get married why not?

Doesn't your definition preclude interracial marriage being a civil right, too?

This seems semantic to me -- wrong is wrong, no matter the definitions of the wrong -- but just saying.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: May 09, 2012, 06:33:00 PM »

the only interesting question I can think of: was Biden's comment a 'teaser' for the already-planned real thing, or was it an off-the-cuff thing that led the Obama camp to the decision that it would be easier to just cut all the threads now rather than try to backtrack and piss off LGBT donors and orgs and etc?
Logged
Purch
Rookie
**
Posts: 196


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: May 09, 2012, 06:34:18 PM »
« Edited: May 09, 2012, 06:36:22 PM by Purch »

Even though I'm pro gay marriage there is some truth to the statement you made. Personally I think gay rights is a struggle over the need to re-define marriage ( Which I feel the traditional man and women only thing is outdated). Personally when I think of a Civil rights issue I thinnk of an issue in which the majority of the people have a right whiles a minority is denied these rights, Think African American's not being allowed to vote whiles white Americans were. However no man in America(Well before states voted on it) black/white/Hispanic/Asian had the right to marry someone of their own sex so I don't really see how it's defined as a civil rights. If it was a civil rights issue I feel someone(The majority) would have to have the rights to marry their own sex and that majority would have to be denying a minority that same right but that's not the case.

Anyhow we're in 2012 and we need to redefine marrige, If Gay couples wanna be miserable like half the people who get married why not?

Doesn't your definition preclude interracial marriage being a civil right, too?

This seems semantic to me -- wrong is wrong, no matter the definitions of the wrong -- but just saying.
Yes because to my knowledge no one else in the country had the right to legally marry someone of another race. But I feel the Loving v. Virginia decision redefined marriage to mean a union between two consenting adults regardless of race.  That's kind of where I think the gay rights issue should be heading to a place where Marriage is redefined as a union between two consenting adults regardless of sex.


O no doubt it's definitly semantics but I'm strict with what I classify as Civil rights issues.. Doesn't mean it isn't less wrong to deny them their pursuit of happiness.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,867
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: May 09, 2012, 06:35:50 PM »

Even though I'm pro gay marriage there is some truth to the statement you made. Personally I think gay rights is a struggle over the need to re-define marriage ( Which I feel the traditional man and women only thing is outdated). Personally when I think of a Civil rights issue I thinnk of an issue in which the majority of the people have a right whiles a minority is denied these rights, Think African American's not being allowed to vote whiles white Americans were. However no man in America(Well before states voted on it) black/white/Hispanic/Asian had the right to marry someone of their own sex so I don't really see how it's defined as a civil rights. If it was a civil rights issue I feel someone(The majority) would have to have the rights to marry their own sex and that majority would have to be denying a minority that same right but that's not the case.

Anyhow we're in 2012 and we need to redefine marrige, If Gay couples wanna be miserable like half the people who get married why not?

Doesn't your definition preclude interracial marriage being a civil right, too?

Yes because to my knowledge no one else in the country had the right to legally marry someone of another race. But I feel the Loving v. Virginia decision redefined marriage to mean a union between two consenting adults regardless of race.  That's kind of where I think the gay rights issue should be heading to a place where Marriage is redefined as a union between two consenting adults regardless of sex.

That's fair.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,080
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: May 09, 2012, 06:57:04 PM »

It's good that Obama is finally (sort of) clear on the subject.  The trip here was ridiculous though.
Logged
NY Jew
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 538


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: May 09, 2012, 07:15:28 PM »

I didn't realize that marriage was also on that one besides uncivil unions.
but I guess since it passed a few years later means that more people are becoming against this perversion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_Proposition_102_%282008%29
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: May 09, 2012, 07:22:54 PM »

I didn't realize that marriage was also on that one besides uncivil unions.
but I guess since it passed a few years later means that more people are becoming against this perversion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_Proposition_102_%282008%29

I'd be careful with the "perversion" talk — that's starting to drift into infractable territory. And the moderator who patrols these boards is very biased when it comes to gay issues.
Logged
Holmes
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,719
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -5.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: May 09, 2012, 07:29:11 PM »

Straights are more likely to vote against anti-gay amendments if there might be consequences for them! Who knew?
Logged
NY Jew
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 538


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: May 09, 2012, 07:43:50 PM »

I didn't realize that marriage was also on that one besides uncivil unions.
but I guess since it passed a few years later means that more people are becoming against this perversion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_Proposition_102_%282008%29

I'd be careful with the "perversion" talk — that's starting to drift into infractable territory. And the moderator who patrols these boards is very biased when it comes to gay issues.
so I can be called a bigot for thinking that immoral and harmful behavior should be banned and even more so not be encouraged (which is what being allowed to "marry" would do)

I guess liberals are the least tolerant people in the world.
Logged
Alcon
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,867
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: May 09, 2012, 09:14:02 PM »

Right NY Jew...they oppose "immoral, perverted behavior" but defeated a vote to disallow the "immoral perverts" to have domestic partnership rights.  A lot of people are ambivalent about the gay marriage issue -- as a public policy matter, that's unfathomable to me, but whatever -- but your specific issue has been out of the mainstream for years.  Best of luck.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: May 09, 2012, 09:35:41 PM »

Right NY Jew...they oppose "immoral, perverted behavior" but defeated a vote to disallow the "immoral perverts" to have domestic partnership rights.  A lot of people are ambivalent about the gay marriage issue -- as a public policy matter, that's unfathomable to me, but whatever -- but your specific issue has been out of the mainstream for years.  Best of luck.

I think the latest polling was 50-48, so it's not mainstream.

It will cost Obama a few states, NC, maybe VA and OH.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.062 seconds with 12 queries.