The President comes out in support of gay marriage!



Page 2 of 6 [ 77 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

NowhereMan1966
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: Oct 15, 2011
Posts: 142
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

09 May 2012, 11:20 pm

I personally favor traditional marriage but my take is I see it more as a State's Rights issue than a equality one. IMHO, a compromise, I think the government should leave it to the people themselves to decide, leave government out of it, I tend to lean libertarian here but under our legal system, the Constitution is silent here on a Federal level so it is up to each State to decide. Under our system, basically we let the States decide a lot of things, at least we should, and you might end up with a mosaic of laws and customs that are tailored to the people of each State much like it was 200 years ago. Generally I have a different take than most here, some see it as a equality issue or a privacy issue (4th Amendment) but I see it as a more of a 10th Amendment issue. Needless to say, I get it on both sides. I guess if put to the test myself, I'd vote it down, I do have my preference and principles but I'm willing to accept the compromise I lined out above which is the best option. Leave it to the churches and individuals in question although again, legally, leave it to the States.

I don't like judges deciding this, let the people decide and there is the legislative process that can be used too. As Sgt. Joe Friday said in "Dragnet 1967," "if you don't like the law as it is, work within the system to change it." Both side of the issue have access to that.

I think the Administration is trying the same tactic the old guy in the movie "Up," where he distracted the dogs by yelling "Squirrel!" and throwing the dogs off their path. IT is to distract us from our real problems.

I think we have more problems than this and, yes, I'm paleo-libertarian/conservative, which side I fall on depends on the issue, I really don't fit into labels. Really, if I lose on this issue, so be it, but I'm more worried about the economy, Iran, other foreign policy issues, putting food on the table, gas prices and generally don't like the direction our current leadership is taking us. I see this as an attempt by the current leader to divide us more and a diversion to the real issues mentioned above. Straight or gay and so on, we all face those same issues of trying to survive. Seriously, this is among the last things to worry about. We need to quit hurting each other and concentrate on our real problems.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Jun 19, 2008
Posts: 12327
Location: Montréal

09 May 2012, 11:25 pm

Raptor wrote:
Quote:
The President comes out in support of gay marriage!


Big surprise there............ :roll:


Do not worry, it just means the Rapture™ is soon, where the apocalyptic final battle between Jesus and Mohammed (the Antichrist) on top of Mount Rushmore (after it is relocated to Israel) will take place, while God's chosen ('Merica) move on to the Kingdom of Heaven, which will be a theocratic communist state with God and his son (who is also himself) as Dear Leader


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Apr 12, 2010
Posts: 20646
Location: Spokane Valley, Washington

09 May 2012, 11:36 pm

NowhereMan1966 wrote:
I personally favor traditional marriage but my take is I see it more as a State's Rights issue than a equality one. IMHO, a compromise, I think the government should leave it to the people themselves to decide, leave government out of it, I tend to lean libertarian here but under our legal system, the Constitution is silent here on a Federal level so it is up to each State to decide. Under our system, basically we let the States decide a lot of things, at least we should, and you might end up with a mosaic of laws and customs that are tailored to the people of each State much like it was 200 years ago. Generally I have a different take than most here, some see it as a equality issue or a privacy issue (4th Amendment) but I see it as a more of a 10th Amendment issue. Needless to say, I get it on both sides. I guess if put to the test myself, I'd vote it down, I do have my preference and principles but I'm willing to accept the compromise I lined out above which is the best option. Leave it to the churches and individuals in question although again, legally, leave it to the States.

I don't like judges deciding this, let the people decide and there is the legislative process that can be used too. As Sgt. Joe Friday said in "Dragnet 1967," "if you don't like the law as it is, work within the system to change it." Both side of the issue have access to that.

I think the Administration is trying the same tactic the old guy in the movie "Up," where he distracted the dogs by yelling "Squirrel!" and throwing the dogs off their path. IT is to distract us from our real problems.

I think we have more problems than this and, yes, I'm paleo-libertarian/conservative, which side I fall on depends on the issue, I really don't fit into labels. Really, if I lose on this issue, so be it, but I'm more worried about the economy, Iran, other foreign policy issues, putting food on the table, gas prices and generally don't like the direction our current leadership is taking us. I see this as an attempt by the current leader to divide us more and a diversion to the real issues mentioned above. Straight or gay and so on, we all face those same issues of trying to survive. Seriously, this is among the last things to worry about. We need to quit hurting each other and concentrate on our real problems.


I'm afraid I must disagree, as if civil rights for blacks were left up to the states, they would still be second class citizens - at least in the south. The rights of citizens should never be left up to popular vote, because unpopular groups will always be the losers.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Jan 28, 2008
Posts: 7713
Location: Seattle Area

09 May 2012, 11:45 pm

I'll continue my recent lazy posting streak and let Radley Balko say what I was thinking:

Radley Balko wrote:
I’m sorry, but I’m not really seeing the bravery or heroism, here. It’s important, sure. And it’s historic. And it might prove to be an effective use of the bully pulpit.

It’s also about f*cking time. Basically, Obama announced to the country today that he, personally, is cool with gay marriage. It’s a position he has allegedly held all along, but didn’t have the political spine to state publicly prior to this afternoon. Even then, he only made his statement after carefully strategizing with his aides to make sure it wouldn’t damage him politically. Or I guess to put it more accurately, once his aides convinced him that his gutless silence was hurting him more than what he said today possibly could.

Obama’s statement doesn’t change a single policy. He has basically adopted a federalist approach to the issue. To my knowledge, gay marriage also happens to be the only issue in which Obama embraces federalism. Obama apparently believes the states should be able to discriminate when it comes to marriage benefits, but if they allow cancer and AIDS patients to smoke pot, he asserts the supremacy of federal law, and sends in the SWAT teams. What a twisted set of priorities.

Moreover, because the federal government is actively discriminating against homosexual couples based on whether or not the state where they reside recognizes their marriage, there’s actually a decent equal protection argument argument against letting the states decide this issue. Or, better yet, for the federal government to just stop conferring special benefits onto heterosexual couples. Or, still better yet, to stop conferring benefits onto married couples at all.* And I say that as someone who generally believes in federalism. (And, to be fair, who isn’t married.)

I’ve been happy to praise Obama on those unfortunately few occasions when there’s been reason to do so. But this? This is a president half-assing it while still keeping plenty of political cover, and on an issue in which he could have effected real change had he had the courage of his convictions years ago.

As leadership goes, it’s little more than acknowledging the direction the wind is blowing. It hardly merits a new chapter for Profiles in Courage.

(*Insert boilerplate libertarian disclaimer about how government shouldn’t be in the business of sanctioning relationships
in the first place.)

Bold is mine.
http://www.theagitator.com/2012/05/09/o ... -marriage/


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


PM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Oct 14, 2010
Posts: 1473
Location: Southeastern United States

09 May 2012, 11:51 pm

This being politics, The Republican Party is going to take advantage of this as is the Christian Right.


_________________
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?


Delphiki
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Apr 14, 2012
Posts: 1415
Location: My own version of reality

09 May 2012, 11:58 pm

Traditional marriage? I haven't heard of people giving cattle lately


_________________
Well you can go with that if you want.


NowhereMan1966
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: Oct 15, 2011
Posts: 142
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

10 May 2012, 12:01 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

I'm afraid I must disagree, as if civil rights for blacks were left up to the states, they would still be second class citizens - at least in the south. The rights of citizens should never be left up to popular vote, because unpopular groups will always be the losers.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I'm afraid I got to disagree here.

I think the civil rights issues should have been handled differently than it was, because overall it is now being used to declare everything a civil right. I always believed that Martin Luther king should have taken more of a libertarian (Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged) tack than a religious one where instead of character, a person has the right to keep what he/she earns through their own labors and merits no matter who they are. It's just me I guess.

I don't know, we do have the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to mitigate some of it to offer some protection. I know our system isn't perfect, but I'll take it over anything else. I think over time, things would have worked out. Also, I'm sure if people are not happy in their State, they'd move to one that is more friendly and/or closer to their views. I do like the State's Rights idea where the Libertarians focus on New Hampshire, the hippie types on Vermont, Born Again Christians on South Carolina and so on. I view the Federal System as more like a NATO setup, albeit with a little more power where the States are members and contribute resources for defense, a highway/water/air system, a court system to handle disputes between the States, handle foreign policy and a couple of sundry things like sending up a Space Shuttle or three.. I just see it that if it is not part of the Constitution and/or Bill of Rights, it should be left to the States to decide.

Well, off to bed.



NowhereMan1966
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: Oct 15, 2011
Posts: 142
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

10 May 2012, 12:03 am

PM wrote:
This being politics, The Republican Party is going to take advantage of this as is the Christian Right.


I'm registered Republican and I do say we should just let this drop, as I said before ,we have other issues, the economy, Iran and so on.



NowhereMan1966
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: Oct 15, 2011
Posts: 142
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

10 May 2012, 12:08 am

Delphiki wrote:
Traditional marriage? I haven't heard of people giving cattle lately


Hmmmm, good one! ;) There is a side of me that wonders if arranged marriages should be brought back, but then again, I would be afraid of who my parents would have matched me with. :) At least though, this poor ASer, me, would have a spouse, I suck at dating anyhoo. :p Cattle, well, don't have the place for them. :)



Delphiki
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Apr 14, 2012
Posts: 1415
Location: My own version of reality

10 May 2012, 12:11 am

NowhereMan1966 wrote:
Delphiki wrote:
Traditional marriage? I haven't heard of people giving cattle lately


Hmmmm, good one! ;) There is a side of me that wonders if arranged marriages should be brought back, but then again, I would be afraid of who my parents would have matched me with. :) At least though, this poor ASer, me, would have a spouse, I suck at dating anyhoo. :p Cattle, well, don't have the place for them. :)


What I was saying in a joking way is why is heterosexual "tradional" marriage so much better? Giving cattle and marrying off your live stock, oops I meant daughters.

How does it effect you? If you think being gay is a sin then they are still going to hell. So you are good there.

(I don't think being gay is a sin, heard that from Tosh, like the show Tosh.0. I thought he used some good logic there)


_________________
Well you can go with that if you want.


Last edited by Delphiki on 10 May 2012, 12:29 am, edited 1 time in total.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Apr 12, 2010
Posts: 20646
Location: Spokane Valley, Washington

10 May 2012, 12:28 am

NowhereMan1966 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:

I'm afraid I must disagree, as if civil rights for blacks were left up to the states, they would still be second class citizens - at least in the south. The rights of citizens should never be left up to popular vote, because unpopular groups will always be the losers.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I'm afraid I got to disagree here.

I think the civil rights issues should have been handled differently than it was, because overall it is now being used to declare everything a civil right. I always believed that Martin Luther king should have taken more of a libertarian (Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged) tack than a religious one where instead of character, a person has the right to keep what he/she earns through their own labors and merits no matter who they are. It's just me I guess.

I don't know, we do have the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to mitigate some of it to offer some protection. I know our system isn't perfect, but I'll take it over anything else. I think over time, things would have worked out. Also, I'm sure if people are not happy in their State, they'd move to one that is more friendly and/or closer to their views. I do like the State's Rights idea where the Libertarians focus on New Hampshire, the hippie types on Vermont, Born Again Christians on South Carolina and so on. I view the Federal System as more like a NATO setup, albeit with a little more power where the States are members and contribute resources for defense, a highway/water/air system, a court system to handle disputes between the States, handle foreign policy and a couple of sundry things like sending up a Space Shuttle or three.. I just see it that if it is not part of the Constitution and/or Bill of Rights, it should be left to the States to decide.

Well, off to bed.


And I could not disagree more. A black man or woman could accomplish more than any white person, and still never achieve equality in the eyes of the white majority. And just to let you in on something - - I'm hardly a fan of that Christ hating witch, Ayn Rand. Because despite what she may have thought, everyone is of equal worth - even the least of us.
And as to your second point - the United States of America is not an alliance like NATO, but rather a solid, single nation. I think the Civil War settled that point.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Jeffrey228
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: Apr 23, 2011
Posts: 152

10 May 2012, 1:04 am

Well one thing is for certian, Marriage Equlity is something that also lifts other restrictions and Barriers besides Same Sex, Mixed Races can marry other races without restriction, including those of the Middle East and Asia would be happy to see this, also it limits the Restrictions for who you can Marry too,

But the Republicans and those of the Tea Party want the classic Traditional 1900s to 1960s type weddings that were more restricted and made sure they were in a Church, and not something like a Shrine or Temple as it is outside of the Christan Religion.



VMSmith
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Apr 17, 2011
Posts: 2737
Location: the old country

10 May 2012, 2:56 am

i'm glad obama has said he supports it but i cannot help but suspect that it isnt entirely sincere. he did spend all that time in office and did nothing to repeal doma. he shouldn't be praised for supporting it- it's like a basic human right, if you don't support it there is something wrong with you. it's a shame that our own leader still won't budge on her own views. there is support on both sides of the political spectrum for this. it isn't a left or right issue. don't know why she bothers. we'll get it in the end. even churches are coming out in support of marriage equality. it just bugs me that they keep saying tradition deems marriage to be between man and woman and it has always been so. tradition is a stupid reason to do anything and it hasn't always been so. hopefully obamas change of mind will translate into action otherwise its just him trying to score points.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Jun 19, 2008
Posts: 12327
Location: Montréal

10 May 2012, 3:04 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
NowhereMan1966 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:

I'm afraid I must disagree, as if civil rights for blacks were left up to the states, they would still be second class citizens - at least in the south. The rights of citizens should never be left up to popular vote, because unpopular groups will always be the losers.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I'm afraid I got to disagree here.

I think the civil rights issues should have been handled differently than it was, because overall it is now being used to declare everything a civil right. I always believed that Martin Luther king should have taken more of a libertarian (Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged) tack than a religious one where instead of character, a person has the right to keep what he/she earns through their own labors and merits no matter who they are. It's just me I guess.

I don't know, we do have the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to mitigate some of it to offer some protection. I know our system isn't perfect, but I'll take it over anything else. I think over time, things would have worked out. Also, I'm sure if people are not happy in their State, they'd move to one that is more friendly and/or closer to their views. I do like the State's Rights idea where the Libertarians focus on New Hampshire, the hippie types on Vermont, Born Again Christians on South Carolina and so on. I view the Federal System as more like a NATO setup, albeit with a little more power where the States are members and contribute resources for defense, a highway/water/air system, a court system to handle disputes between the States, handle foreign policy and a couple of sundry things like sending up a Space Shuttle or three.. I just see it that if it is not part of the Constitution and/or Bill of Rights, it should be left to the States to decide.

Well, off to bed.


And I could not disagree more. A black man or woman could accomplish more than any white person, and still never achieve equality in the eyes of the white majority. And just to let you in on something - - I'm hardly a fan of that Christ hating witch, Ayn Rand. Because despite what she may have thought, everyone is of equal worth - even the least of us.
And as to your second point - the United States of America is not an alliance like NATO, but rather a solid, single nation. I think the Civil War settled that point.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Sadly, not for everyone


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


mushroo
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: Sep 14, 2011
Posts: 492

10 May 2012, 11:45 am

I think I understand the timing of Obama's comment now.

His contacts at the Washington Post probably tipped him off they were working on this story:

Quote:
BLOOMFIELD HILLS, Mich. — Mitt Romney returned from a three-week spring break in 1965 to resume his studies as a high school senior at the prestigious Cranbrook School. Back on the handsome campus, studded with Tudor brick buildings and manicured fields, he spotted something he thought did not belong at a school where the boys wore ties and carried briefcases. John Lauber, a soft-spoken new student one year behind Romney, was perpetually teased for his nonconformity and presumed homosexuality. Now he was walking around the all-boys school with bleached-blond hair that draped over one eye, and Romney wasn’t having it.

“He can’t look like that. That’s wrong. Just look at him!” an incensed Romney told Matthew Friedemann, his close friend in the Stevens Hall dorm, according to Friedemann’s recollection. Mitt, the teenaged son of Michigan Gov. George Romney, kept complaining about Lauber’s look, Friedemann recalled.

A few days later, Friedemann entered Stevens Hall off the school’s collegiate quad to find Romney marching out of his own room ahead of a prep school posse shouting about their plan to cut Lauber’s hair. Friedemann followed them to a nearby room where they came upon Lauber, tackled him and pinned him to the ground. As Lauber, his eyes filling with tears, screamed for help, Romney repeatedly clipped his hair with a pair of scissors...


Full story: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html



Display posts from previous:  Sort by  


Page 2 of 6 [ 77 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next



 Similar Topics 
Who do you support for President?

[ Go to page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ]

in Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

08 Apr 2008, 4:07 pm

SqrachMasda View the latest post

Who do you support for President?

[ Go to page: 1, 2 ]

in Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

16 Dec 2007, 7:17 pm

Odin View the latest post

To all who support gay marriage

[ Go to page: 1, 2, 3 ]

in Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

09 Aug 2007, 2:02 am

calandale View the latest post

Do you support gay marriage?

[ Go to page: 1 ... 5, 6, 7 ]

in Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

10 Dec 2008, 10:01 pm

slowmutant View the latest post



You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
Jump to: