My Response to President Obama In A Historic Announcement, And On The Heels of A Painful Defeat in North Carolina, President Obama Announced His Support for Same-Sex Marriage
My Response to President Obama
Today marks the first time in history a President of the United States has stated his support for marriage equality. I am thrilled by this news, and I commend the President for taking what many pundits inevitably will say was an “unnecessary” risk in an election year. Such an assessment, however, sadly only underscores the second-class status many LGBT Americans experience daily, knowing that their rights and lives are nothing more than a political tool to be hauled out to rally the base, for or against.
It is time to stop the politics and address the basic question of fairness, for that is what this is about. We cannot say we are a nation that stands for equality, while in the same breath denying basic rights of happiness, financial parity, and state-recognized companionship to millions. Nor can we any longer trot out the tired notion that civil unions and marriages are the same. For if they were, we would not call them by different names. Separate can never be equal–a lesson we learned during the Civil Rights era that we have yet to apply to the struggle for LGBT rights today.
The President has done the right thing, and history will remember him for it. But for today, I am all smiles. On behalf of the LGBT community, and all those who support our cause, thank you, President Obama.
Today, I can proudly feel wholly American.
–George Takei
[This message has been edited by Doni Hagan (edited 05-09-2012).]
IP: Logged
06:42 PM
Rickady88GT Member
Posts: 10657 From: Central CA Registered: Dec 2002
Political stunt is what it is, comming from this clown. He is panhadling for votes. Last pole I saw on this said the opinion was split %50-%50. So he must think he has nothing to loose by swooping up the gay union votes. Nevermind the fact that not to long ago he suported traditional marriage,.......maybe somebody should have asked him what that meant?
For the record I will never support it, but I do think it is the persons choice to live that life style and should not be harrased, just like the people that do not support the life style should be allowed to live with their choice and not be harassed for it. I would not sell out for votes. Just tell the people how you feel and not beat around the bush. Romney already came out and made no bones about it, he does not support gay marriage.
[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 05-09-2012).]
IP: Logged
06:50 PM
Rickady88GT Member
Posts: 10657 From: Central CA Registered: Dec 2002
It is about time President Obama came out of the closet on this issue. He is a more honest man today than he was yesterday. Actually, he is a more honest man on this issue than he has been since he started running for President.
I wonder how some of his voters feel that bought the last four years of lies he has told about his stance on same sex marriage.
------------------
IP: Logged
07:00 PM
Rickady88GT Member
Posts: 10657 From: Central CA Registered: Dec 2002
Originally posted by Doug85GT: He is a more honest man today than he was yesterday. Actually, he is a more honest man on this issue than he has been since he started running for President.
I dont know about all that, but only he knows his heart. The problem with all the lies is that evenually his supporters wont know when he is telling the truth.
quote
Originally posted by Doug85GT:
I wonder how some of his voters feel that bought the last four years of lies he has told about his stance on same sex marriage.
Just tell them the lie they want to hear and they will vote the way you say.
marriage is a religous event, obama, shouldn't be opening he's mouth.. and if it wasn't "i need votes" he'd say nothing.. we where founded on religous freedom, sorry, laws either granting or banning gay marriage should not be even happening at all.. seperation of church and state... it's so easy to end it, give a civil unoin the same rights as a marriage.. leave marriage to the religous.. like it's always been, and stop try'n to force the meaning of that religous event... gays have to get over the fact that ROME isn't even gonna change their stance on this.. at least not in our life time.. can't have it both ways, seperation of church and state when you want it, and togetherness when you want it.. the answer is simple, just grant the same rights to a civil union.. and be done with it.. my uncles been with the same guy for 35+ years.. they respect the religous event to much to want to be "married" but would like the same rights.. when it come to the legal laws/etc
Sure, maybe it's a cry for votes, but I completely agree with George Takei. I commend the president on taking a stance on something controversial, as opposed to his usual "Say something vague to keep everyone happy" road (that admittedly has been in politics well before Obama came around... or was born).
I'm not an Obama supporter, but we need to accept that social issues cannot be defined by our personal beliefs, but by the core values that our country is based on.
IP: Logged
07:56 PM
Uaana Member
Posts: 6570 From: Robbinsdale MN US Registered: Dec 1999
<<Conspiracy theory>>.. Nothing but a stunt to detract from economic and employment numbers.
Personally.. and hopefully for the last time.. "State marriage" should be open to all with civil unions. Where and how you get married should be up to the institution / church etc of your choice that is willing to perform the service.
Tax laws could end up being messy though.. Another reason to simplify the tax code.
I'm not an Obama supporter, but we need to accept that social issues cannot be defined by our personal beliefs, but by the core values that our country is based on.
My "in box" is lighting up like crazy....This from Ryan Totka, Neil Patrick Harris' booking agent.
Regardless of reasons... It was the RIGHT thing to do. Equal is Equal. Just because you (you being John Q. Public) don't like the thought of two mean screwing (But I bet you would love to watch two women) Just because you don't want to picture it.. Does not mean that a country founded on fairness and equal rights for all should deny these basic rights to the LGBT community.
IP: Logged
08:53 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
My Response to President Obama In A Historic Announcement, And On The Heels of A Painful Defeat in North Carolina, President Obama Announced His Support for Same-Sex Marriage
My Response to President Obama
Today marks the first time in history a President of the United States has stated his support for marriage equality. I am thrilled by this news, and I commend the President for taking what many pundits inevitably will say was an “unnecessary” risk in an election year. Such an assessment, however, sadly only underscores the second-class status many LGBT Americans experience daily, knowing that their rights and lives are nothing more than a political tool to be hauled out to rally the base, for or against.
It is time to stop the politics and address the basic question of fairness, for that is what this is about. We cannot say we are a nation that stands for equality, while in the same breath denying basic rights of happiness, financial parity, and state-recognized companionship to millions. Nor can we any longer trot out the tired notion that civil unions and marriages are the same. For if they were, we would not call them by different names. Separate can never be equal–a lesson we learned during the Civil Rights era that we have yet to apply to the struggle for LGBT rights today.
The President has done the right thing, and history will remember him for it. But for today, I am all smiles. On behalf of the LGBT community, and all those who support our cause, thank you, President Obama.
Yeesh now taking a defined stand on a such controversial issue is "cry for votes". With the U.S. polling as divided on the issue I'm unsure how.
I don't think it has anything to do with votes, blacks are overwhelmingly against it, could cost him.
In the past couple of weeks even the left-wing media has been asking some hard questions that had to be bothersome to the White House. I am thinking this is to get them back on his side, and nothing more. It is an issue that is dear to their hearts! Must get reelected at any cost is how most politician think.
[This message has been edited by partfiero (edited 05-09-2012).]
marriage is a religous event, obama, shouldn't be opening he's mouth.. and if it wasn't "i need votes" he'd say nothing.. we where founded on religous freedom, sorry, laws either granting or banning gay marriage should not be even happening at all.. seperation of church and state... it's so easy to end it, give a civil unoin the same rights as a marriage.. leave marriage to the religous.. like it's always been, and stop try'n to force the meaning of that religous event... gays have to get over the fact that ROME isn't even gonna change their stance on this.. at least not in our life time.. can't have it both ways, seperation of church and state when you want it, and togetherness when you want it.. the answer is simple, just grant the same rights to a civil union.. and be done with it.. my uncles been with the same guy for 35+ years.. they respect the religous event to much to want to be "married" but would like the same rights.. when it come to the legal laws/etc
I really don't even know where to start... I'm too tired right now to type out my dissertation on why you're wrong about marriage being a 'religious event', so that will have to wait.
Political stunt is what it is, comming from this clown. He is panhadling for votes. Last pole I saw on this said the opinion was split %50-%50. So he must think he has nothing to loose by swooping up the gay union votes. Nevermind the fact that not to long ago he suported traditional marriage,.......maybe somebody should have asked him what that meant?
For the record I will never support it, but I do think it is the persons choice to live that life style and should not be harrased, just like the people that do not support the life style should be allowed to live with their choice and not be harassed for it. I would not sell out for votes. Just tell the people how you feel and not beat around the bush. Romney already came out and made no bones about it, he does not support gay marriage.
I in no way mean this insulting. How is that not a bigoted view? Someone isn't the same as you so they are not allowed the same rights? I'm not sure how someone else being married affects you or anyone. I just never understand this side of the argument. When people say due to religious beliefs, what if someone is a part of a religion where being gay is they path of righteousness?
IP: Logged
09:23 PM
James Bond 007 Member
Posts: 8872 From: California.U.S.A. Registered: Dec 2002
He's only trying to get the Gay Vote and its probubley going to back fire in his face,because maney Christians wont Vote for him at reelection time.
+1 .. I saw his moving away from being tight lipped on the issue as a hindrance to him this November. This kind of position, while I approve for my personal beliefs, is likely going to be a speedbump to his re-election efforts. Black men MIGHT vote against him, but I doubt it.. fundamentalist voters tend to vote Republican anyway.. but there are some moderate and even liberal Christians out there who voted for him that may change their mind come November because of this stance. And I see this being one of the tightest election cycles ever (polls now indicate a dead heat between them) so why go out on a limb and alienate potential voters when you could be quiet and keep them? I think he will lose more votes than he gains, gays/lesbians already overwhelmingly supported him.
IP: Logged
10:19 PM
Rickady88GT Member
Posts: 10657 From: Central CA Registered: Dec 2002
Originally posted by ls3mach: I in no way mean this insulting. How is that not a bigoted view?
How is it biggoted to say "I disagree with what you do. I dont harass you about it, in fact I will defend you against harassment. But dont force your views on me."?
To me it is the same as a drug adict. If that is the life he wants then so be it. Dont harass me because I disagree with it and dont even think about forcing me to accept what you do. It is wrong.
IP: Logged
10:34 PM
blackrams Member
Posts: 33190 From: Covington, TN, USA Registered: Feb 2003
He's only trying to get the Gay Vote and its probubley going to back fire in his face,because maney Christians wont Vote for him at reelection time.
President Obama already knows he won't get any of the Conservative vote but, he's taken a lot of heat from the Liberal side the last year or so. This will help bring the disappointed Libs back into the fold. As it was, he stood the chance of not getting a block of voters that had lost faith in his Hope and Change progressive socialist programs. If you look at Obama's record on this issue, it falls directly in line with whatever would secure votes in the past. This is no different. He has been all over the board. I honestly doubt he really cares one way or another, if it will help him retain his office, he'd sell his soul.
------------------ Ron The key thing is to wake up breathing! All the rest can be fixed. (Except Stupid - You can't fix that) Always remember these words of wisdom.
"The Lord must truly love fools, for he made them in abundance."
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 05-09-2012).]
IP: Logged
10:37 PM
cliffw Member
Posts: 37862 From: Bandera, Texas, USA Registered: Jun 2003
Originally posted by newf: Yeesh now taking a defined stand on a such controversial issue is "cry for votes". With the U.S. polling as divided on the issue I'm unsure how.
Okay, what is it then ? That is the question. The answer is, damage control. Bumbling Biden backed him into it.
IP: Logged
11:21 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
That's the same link that was forwarded to me... ?
Probably. I added the link to show it was indeed from George Takei and not just a random email that was attributed to him. George Takei's web page is: http://www.georgetakei.com/ His blog is linked from there. The Allegiance Musical is a big project he's currently working on. It was a bit confusing at first not finding his blog on the georgetakei.com site itself.
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 05-09-2012).]
Beyond the cynicism...of which I too am guilty....maybe his conscience finally spoke loud enough to be heard.
He wouldn't be where he is today were it not for those preceding him who battled for the right to be on the same footing as everyone else. Nothing in this nation's history demonstrates it would've happened otherwise.
The fight for Gay Rights in America is precipitated by religious interpretations, no more no less. It's not economic and certainly not a result of their lack of contribution to the social and political fabric of this country. Religion has been used in the past to deny other groups their equal rights and/or justification for discriminatory practices....just ask the Jews, for example.
[This message has been edited by Doni Hagan (edited 05-09-2012).]
Probably. I added the link to show it was indeed from George Takei and not just a random email that was attributed to him. George Takei's web page is: http://www.georgetakei.com/ His blog is linked from there. The Allegiance Musical is a big project he's currently working on. It was a bit confusing at first not finding his blog on the georgetakei.com site itself.
I just "copy & pasted" the text itself. I neglected to add the link.
This is why I think we need to separate "marriage" from "domestic unions."
If marriage is a religious concept, it really doesn't have a place in government... However, if we choose to grant all the same rights to couples -gay, straight, dolphin, whatever- that have entered into a domestic partnership that we grant to those who are "married," wouldn't we be on equal footing?
To get married, you'd go to your religious institution of choice and join in a faith-based union... Then, if you're so inclined, you file for your civil partnership papers, where you get all the tax breaks and etc. You can be married without the government and you can be a legal couple without the church.
_________________________________________ I'm very tired, so that probably wasn't the most coherent post I've ever made...
IP: Logged
01:13 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27106 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
This is why I think we need to separate "marriage" from "domestic unions."
If marriage is a religious concept, it really doesn't have a place in government... However, if we choose to grant all the same rights to couples -gay, straight, dolphin, whatever- that have entered into a domestic partnership that we grant to those who are "married," wouldn't we be on equal footing?
To get married, you'd go to your religious institution of choice and join in a faith-based union... Then, if you're so inclined, you file for your civil partnership papers, where you get all the tax breaks and etc. You can be married without the government and you can be a legal couple without the church.
_________________________________________ I'm very tired, so that probably wasn't the most coherent post I've ever made...
YES, agreed.
As a matter of compromise, make two ways of being "hitched". Marriage, which you do in a church or religious institution, and "civil union", which is done by a government institution. Pass a law that says both are equal under the law.
Just jump a broom. My wife and I jumped a broom 2 hours before we had the ceremony and then legal paperwork signing. In our minds, it was good enough before all the hullabaloo, which we enjoyed less as well. We were married, in our minds, before it was "official".. and since its a tradition that has happened in my family in the past (does tbone have "one in the woodpile"?!) then why is that tradition not good enough for me now?
Just thinking out loud here, but what is more important... the idea of being together, or the legal 'benefits' of being married legally? I don't like that people who are partners are not allowed to be with them when they are dying, not allowed to get insurance through their partner..etc... I am in favor of shoring up these deficiencies in our system, and after that shouldn't jumping a broom be good enough for anyone? What's at stake besides a last name? (Which my wife and I STILL have different last names for professional reasons..) After we recognize civil unions, let the zealots and fundamentalists have "marriage", at that point it is just a word.
IP: Logged
01:22 AM
htexans1 Member
Posts: 9115 From: Clear Lake City/Houston TX Registered: Sep 2001
My wife and I jumped a broom 2 hours before we had the ceremony and then legal paperwork signing. In our minds, it was good enough before all the hullabaloo, which we enjoyed less as well. We were married, in our minds, before it was "official".. and since its a tradition that has happened in my family in the past (does tbone have "one in the woodpile"?!) then why is that tradition not good enough for me now?
