Skip to main content

At his "victory lap" press conference on Wednesday, the president revealed that his views on gay marriage are "evolving".

"My feelings are constantly evolving," Obama told reporters about his position on gay marriage.

"I have friends, I have people who work for me, who are in powerful long-lasting gay or lesbians unions," he said, acknowledging that same-sex marriage is "something that means a lot to them."

"My baseline is a strong civil union that affords them legal protections," the president said Wednesday, just before leaving for his Christmas vacation in Hawaii. "I recognize from their perspective, it's not enough."

Source

Shouldn't the gays be celebrating now that Obama has single-handedly repealed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and hints at support for gay marriage? One reason this gay isn't doing back flips is that Obama's views on gay marriage have already evolved.

In a 1996 questionnaire filled out for a Chicago gay and lesbian newspaper, then called Outlines, Obama came out clearly in favor of same-sex marriage, which he has opposed on the public record throughout his short career in national politics.

A Chicago Gay and Lesbian newpaper, the Windy City Times, has unearthed a candidate issue survey written by then Illinois State Senate Candidate Barack Obama in 1996.

Photobucket

Take a look at number 6 (larger image available here):

"6)  I favor legalizing same-sex marriages,and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages."

It's possible that an aide filled this out for him, and he didn't realize what he was signing. That's a claim he's made when other discrepancies between his current views and his prior statements have emerged. The problem is that he completed another candidate survey for IMPACT, then Chicago's main GLBT political action committee, around the same time. This survey was completed by hand.

Photobucket

Look at question 7 (larger image available here):

Do you support the Marriage Resolution, a statement of support for the right of same-gender individuals to marry:

"Because marriage is a basic human right and an individual personal choice,

RESOLVED, the state should not interfere with same-gender couples who [choose] to marry and share fully and equally in the rights, responsibilities and commitment of civil marriage."

If you do not support the resolution, will you at least oppose any attempts to outlaw same gender marriage and/or to ammend reciprocity agreements with states which permit same-gender marriage?  Will you oppose any federal initiatives which attempt to over-ride certain state laws which allow same-gender marriage?

Obama's handwritten response:

I would support such a resolution.

Forgive me while I vomit as some try to paint his "evolution" as the logical outcome of a tortured and thoughtful reflection on his faith and political beliefs. This is the main reason why I have trouble believing anything that comes out of his mouth with respect to LGBT equality. He was for it before he was kinda against it before he was thinking about kinda being for it again.

Originally posted to Just PsycoBabble on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:17 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Just another gay man (31+ / 0-)

    in search of that special right: equality.

    I'm gay and I'm pissed. I'm not giving up, I'm not giving in, I'm not backing down, and I'm not going away. Deal with it.

    by psychodrew on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:17:14 AM PST

    •  No matter what Obama does it is never enough (10+ / 0-)

      for some people. Go vomit and let the rest of us enjoy what has taken place this last week.

      At least he said he is evolving. Anyone here married. Has anyone her had a mate that is for something, then against something, and then for it again. It is called being human. At least he said he is wrestling with it and that opens the door to change.

      Many progressives favor Civil Unions that give the same rights as married people. Is it the rights or the title.

      To me the rights are the important thing.

    •  Obama is doing the best he can (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      keshea01

      Obama truly is a decent guy. He has not lied us into a war. He has been mostly effective even though he inherited a shit economy and an opposition party that acts like a petulant 5 year old child.

      Hit pieces on Obama only drive your allies away. I am such an ally. I am not gay, but I support your cause - it is just and righteous. But you have to know that these kinds of diaries are not helpful - it antagonizes some of your allies. It antagonizes allies like me.

      I trust Obama. Obama was right about how to repeal DADT, even as I saw an endless stream of diaries questioning his commitment to keep that campaign promise. I trust that he is doing the best he can.

      If you do not trust Obama, if you do not believe in your heart that he is decent and that he wants equality, then I suggest you go and find a candidate that passes your litmus test and run him/her in a primary against Obama in 2012. We'll see how that works out for all of us.

      •  On this specific issue (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JohnnyAppleseed

        what's to trust?

        Barack Obama is the only person that I have ever heard retreat from a very progressive position like marriage equality?

        If he does that (for political reasons) then he'll do that on other issues as well, and has (those unconciseable tax cuts, for example).

        I believe that Barack Obama is a decent man...a good man eve, but he is a politician too.

        •  I don't like the tax cuts for the rich either... (0+ / 0-)

          but they were part of a deal that got the DADT repeal, the START treaty ratified, unemployment compensation extended amongst other things. I am willing to live with that, it is politics after all and it isn't like the Senate Republicans held no cards. And yes it is in Obama's nature to try and find compromise when he can. This trait is a weakness in today's political climate, but honestly that is who he is, that is part of what makes him a decent man. I'll accept that trade off too.

          You ask what's to trust on this issue, and I say look at DADT. He was right all along about how to go about repealing it. If it had been done by Executive Order it would have been repealed the moment the GOP captured the White House. The issue would become a football like the abortion funding crap that gets punted every time the White House changes hands. Another reason he proceeded the way he did was because he promised to Gates that's how it would go. That promise got Gate's to stay on two years ago. That too was a good decision since we needed all the stability we could get with respect to Iraq.

          I honestly believe that we need to worry about Obama getting reelected because he doesn't care enough about it himself. He will always look for results that does the greatest good with respect to its cost. That is what happened on HCR where he knew that no public option was possibly getting past a GOP filibuster. That is what happened on the tax cut deal where he got help for the many (the poor and the middle class), at the cost of unconscionable tax cuts for the few (the wealthy). With regards to us worrying about reelection, this diary is completely counter productive.  It creates angst and it certainly isn't constructive criticism.  

          Merry Christmas.

  •  Yet another politician tells yet another lie. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mattman, pengiep

    HOLY PENIS WHAT A SCOOP

    neca politicos omnes; deus nullos agnoscet.

    by khereva on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:21:25 AM PST

  •  He tested the winds with a wet fin (5+ / 0-)

    and now he's all opposable thumbs.

  •  Biden seems to be forging forward (7+ / 0-)

    If your comment is mean, I might have Sarah Palin sue you.

    by in2mixin on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:26:55 AM PST

    •  I saw that. Almost led with it. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tonedevil, brasilaaron, IndieGuy

      This part is amusing.

      "I think the country's evolving," he said. "And I think you're going to see, you know, the next effort is probably going to be to deal with so-called DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act). He said he agreed with Obama that his position in gay marriage is "evolving." (emphasis mine)

      They're "evolving" together. How cute. Their mutual waffling on LGBT equality has brought them closer together.

      I'm gay and I'm pissed. I'm not giving up, I'm not giving in, I'm not backing down, and I'm not going away. Deal with it.

      by psychodrew on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:29:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  views actually do evolve you know (15+ / 0-)

    the site founder was a reagan republican, I keep hearing.

    "At least when Bush was pulling shit, he was only destroying the Republican party." ~typed, apparently seriously, by Uberbah, 12/20/10

    by mallyroyal on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:28:41 AM PST

  •  I'm willing to give him a chance- reluctantly (12+ / 0-)

    to see how he "re-evolves."

    Like many LGBTs, I've never fully trusted him on this. We still have to hold our breath about DADT, to see its full implementation. He claims it will be "months, not years" and I'll trust him. This time.

    That being said, I also recognize that he is a politician. Unlike many people, I never saw him as anything BUT a politician so I have a little more patience as he tests the waters with more "evolved" positions- especially because I still see DADT repeal as a victory for more people than just Obama.

    P.S. I am not a crackpot.

    by BoiseBlue on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:32:09 AM PST

    •  I agree. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BoiseBlue, yaque, Hayate Yagami

      His was the mainstream Democratic position when he first ran for national office. It's not surprising. It's just hard for me to take this introspection seriously when he held this views in the 1990s.

      I'm gay and I'm pissed. I'm not giving up, I'm not giving in, I'm not backing down, and I'm not going away. Deal with it.

      by psychodrew on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:37:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Many people of a certain age (8+ / 0-)

        (pretty much folks above 40-50) are having the same problem with the issue; it wasn't really till the 1980s or later that folks started coming out en masse. For a lot of everyday Americans, their first "contact" with an out gay person, and one with HIV in that, was 1994's "The Real World" and the late Pedro Zamora (RIP). The first National Coming Out Day was in the late 1980s, pretty much when Obama was busy with law school.

        And also, he has to walk a very thin tightrope between those who think he's doing too much for gay rights (DADT repeal, Matthew Shepard Hate Crime Bill), and those who want even more action. I certainly wouldn't want that job -- I don't know why anyone does at this point. Actually wanting to be President should be the first disqualifier for the job.

        Now to try to end the wars we ask our gay and straight soldiers to fight. -- Chris Hayes

        by Cali Scribe on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:48:00 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  The "months, not years" (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mattman, psychodrew, BoiseBlue

      may have come from SecDef Gates; it's possible many of the steps needed to implement the repeal were discussed as part of the study on whether it would be feasible (which is why the study may ultimately have been a good idea), and thus the Pentagon and service chiefs know what they need to do.

      Now to try to end the wars we ask our gay and straight soldiers to fight. -- Chris Hayes

      by Cali Scribe on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:39:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm with you on this... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      psychodrew, BoiseBlue, yaque

      ... Frankly, I don't expect any presidential candidate to come out strong for marriage equality.

      This is transparent political posturing, but whatever. Politicians all do it. And I'd rather him say that his beliefs are 'evolving' than have him not say anything. It gives cover to other Americans, especially homophobic Democrats, whose beliefs may actually be evolving.

      What I care about are results and, while DADT is a big step in the right direction, the jury is still out on the sum of his presidency.

  •  Many "evolve (2+ / 0-)

    The Kristian Right wants to own the term "Marriage." For a long time, I felt "Make ALL rights available to all humans, ignore the terms." But now I feel that they simply can't pre-empt the use of a term. They don't own the Holiday season, the right to die, the rules for sex or the term "marriage."

    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.

    by MrMichaelMT on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:35:49 AM PST

  •  Hmm, so what would you rather have: (9+ / 0-)

    A) A politician who hides his support for gay marriage in order to get elected and then gradually "comes out" for it as president.

    OR

    B) A politician who hides his support for gay marriage and then does not do so?

    I mean, this is pretty simple here: we can't change the past.  What Obama said in 1996 and then 2008 just doesn't matter anymore--we've got to deal with what he's saying in 2010.  And right now, what he's saying is a big fucking deal.  To have both the POTUS and the VPOTUS indicating that they're coming around on supporting gay marriage is just--well, amazing, in my view.  

    Of the ways to handle his "evolving" views, slapping him in the face for it does. not. help.  We should be encouraging his evolution, not rubbing his nose in something from 1996.

    I finally put in a signature!

    by Boris Godunov on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:37:26 AM PST

  •  In case you hadn't realized this... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jarhead5536

    Obama is a politician.  To a certain extent, part of his ability as a politician was that he made folks think he was not really one.  

    It's like criticizing a bird for having wings or a cat for having claws.

  •  It could be that he has always been for (6+ / 0-)

    marriage for all and that for political reasons he has not shown it ?

    Its true. She loves you. And I told her you loved her, too.

    by indycam on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:39:35 AM PST

    •  I think it's exactly that. nt (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tonedevil

      I'm gay and I'm pissed. I'm not giving up, I'm not giving in, I'm not backing down, and I'm not going away. Deal with it.

      by psychodrew on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:41:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah - me too. So what? (0+ / 0-)

        For whatever reason this seems to bother you.  I think it is great.

        Most of this site seems to revile Obama for not being a trojan horse for the progressive movement.  You on the other hand are pissed off because he actually is a trojan horse for LGBT rights.  Go figure.

        History will not care about his motivations or posturing.  It will judge him based on his actions.  If he is moving us towards the direction of marriage equality, that is an entirely good thing.  I could care less if he evolves or manipulates getting us there.  

        Complaining on the internet is not dissent.

        by snout on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 10:15:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Do you mean like a politician understanding (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Boris Godunov, allergywoman

      the political climate of the country? <snark> I am annoyed as all get-out at Obama and the democrats for the tax bill.  I don't see the logic in complaining about DADT though, this was a coup.

      •  I'm thrilled that DADT was repealed (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        vacantlook, Tonedevil

        though it is reasonable to point out that more than 1000 people were discharged under Obama, the timeline for repeal was of the president's choosing, and that some are concerned that the language in the bill doesn't make the repeal permanent.

        I'm gay and I'm pissed. I'm not giving up, I'm not giving in, I'm not backing down, and I'm not going away. Deal with it.

        by psychodrew on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:49:05 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  All good points, but the political posturing took (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          allergywoman

          center stage in your diary.  Cynically, my immediate reaction to the DADT repeal was that it is obvious wedge-issue red meat thrown out to us, as the game goes, when it appeared to me that Obama was ceding to the Republican corporatists on the tax bill...kind of like the Republicans threw around that whole "make marriage between a man and a woman" etc. Then I decided, I didn't care, right is still right even when it's a gain in a dishonest game.  It's not a low I chose for our political system, it just is the way that it is.  I just continue to hope that the right base gets the meat and that it is substantial.

    •  In other words... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      psychodrew

      ...during the presidential campaign when he said he was going to work against political cynicism, that his saying that was actually an act of political cynicism as he was never going to not use cynicism as his devolved/re-evolving position on marriage equality reveals.

  •  I think the whole country's views on gay marriage (5+ / 0-)

    are evolving and it's a damned good thing too.  My kids' generation will see the end of this long and drawn-out wedge issue, I've nurtured that evolution right along.  I don't really see the need to do backflips to claim a gain as something other than that.

  •  There are a number of issues I go back and forth (7+ / 0-)

    on. The death penalty is probably the biggest one.

    Gay marriage was another. For me civil unions seemed to be enough if all of the same rights were confirmed. It seemed fair to me because there are some genuinely good religious people who felt it hurt their beliefs, even though I don't believe.

    That evolved as I talked to more and more gay friends who saw that as the same as "seperate but equal."

    Some issues take time to solidify in the mind and heart. Call it multiple flip flops, triangulation or whatever. The point is that some issues are't easy to nail down as black and white. There is a lot of grey in this world.

    And now that we have some blue in the sky here in Santa Monica, it's been grey and black for weeks, I think it is time to log off and enjoy a beautiful day.

    Marry Holidays everyone.

    I was Rambo in the disco/ I was shootin' to the beat/ When they burned me in effigy My vacation was complete. Neil Young

    by Mike S on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:41:58 AM PST

    •  that's honest and, I think, represents the way (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mike S, slksfca, Lost and Found

      most people view things. I went back and forth on the death penalty for years until forming a solid opinion.

      There are still issues that I struggle with and probably will for a while because I'm still trying to fully educate myself about them.

      Evolution isn't a bad thing. Devolving for personal or political gain is debatable.

      P.S. I am not a crackpot.

      by BoiseBlue on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 10:04:15 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I actually left (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dinazina

      Catholicism over the view on gay marriage amongst other things.  I feel like if the religion assaults your soul, you're compelled to move away from it...so I don't see the importance of insisting that people that are participating in something I morally and ethically detest sign on with gay marriage.  In fact, I'm certain it won't happen.  The entire underlying theme of organized religion, for centuries, has been about controlling the societal norms and power trippers flock there.  I wish more thinking people would reform churches but the dogmatic basis doesn't really lend itself to that.  I won't go further because I don't want to hijack, but I've long advocated for a different approach to gay marriage that runs with civil unions and then calls it marriage anyway.  What are the churches going to do, band together and sue for the use of the word?  Anyone can make their own dogma, really, once you step into those realms.  Who cares what the government calls it?  We don't want government and church together anyway.

  •  Barack Obama (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mydailydrunk, FiredUpInCA

    is kicking ass on these issues.  I'm very happy with the progress he's made.  Whether his views in this regard are publicly "evolving" seems to be of little consequence.

    -4.75, -5.33 Cheney 10/05/04: "I have not suggested there is a connection between Iraq and 9/11."

    by sunbro on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 09:58:50 AM PST

  •  Oh, great. Another one of these diaries (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JohnnyAppleseed, LadyBlahBlah

    I'm starting to wonder if there are people here who simply will never be happy with anything, and that is not to imply that they should be satisfied.

    "We got DADT repealed, but..."

    How about, instead, "We got DADT repealed (hooray!), and this is what we need to do next..."

    I've been involved in a number of cults, both as a leader and a follower. You have more fun as a follower. But you make more money as a leader. ~Creed Bratton

    by mydailydrunk on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 10:03:36 AM PST

    •  Oh great. Another one of these comments. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      furiousxxgeorge, Hayate Yagami

      "Why can't the uppity fags be happy with what they have?"

      Contribution appreciated.

      I'm gay and I'm pissed. I'm not giving up, I'm not giving in, I'm not backing down, and I'm not going away. Deal with it.

      by psychodrew on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 11:11:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I've only ever seen it as a civil rights issue (0+ / 0-)

        affecting fellow citizens.

        Narrowing the scope to gay v. straight only serves to provide a level of separation.

        I've been involved in a number of cults, both as a leader and a follower. You have more fun as a follower. But you make more money as a leader. ~Creed Bratton

        by mydailydrunk on Sat Dec 25, 2010 at 01:04:30 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  A view from the conservative side. (5+ / 0-)

    For those of you that expect an instant or even a fast evolution to acceptance, I'm here to tell you that it isn't that easy. The LGBT community is fighting against policies that otherwise very ethical people have trouble accepting. The fact is that the LGBT group is a minority group.

    There are a large majority of people that were raised in the "nuclear family" mindset, particularly in the organized religions. Does that excuse racism? NO. But you need to look at it from the others' perspective to understand, and then help them understand that LGBT deserve respect too.

    You see the conservatives are taught to believe in black and white (which is just a lazy excuse, not to use your reasoning skills) and its too easy to put minority groups into a "evil" type classification. When you get a conservative away from the group mindset, and they start interacting with LGBT individuals, you will see the dynamics change and in most cases that person will start to see the LGBT as a person instead of a member of "that group".

    Its not "right" but it takes time to deprogram a conservative point of view.  Its taking generations to knock down racism, but it is getting better and faster now and will get even better as more people young and old obtain more education and interaction. This is where the internet has been helpful IMO.

    In short, your breaking down barriers and there are conservatives that are listening. But you also have powerful influences working in the other direction. I personally feel that we should be working on respect for all (working on the root of the problem) not just minority groups. That starts with the little ones and is always a battle.

    My personal plea, is to have patience with people trying to be more open-minded. Never accept discrimination, but help and don't give up on people that are trying to get past prejudices. And don't expect overnight conversion. Life just doesn't happen that way.

    •  As someone who stole a Mississipian from a racist (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Catte Nappe, TBug

      and homophobic family, I completely and utterly agree with you.  Slowly working each and every one of his younger relatives too.  Older generations are so deeply entrenched and have learned to network their livelihoods based on their racism and clannishness...so that isn't going as well.  

    •  respectfully (10+ / 0-)

      If we wait for conservatives to change their minds we'll never get anywhere. Conservatives can sit in their little corners and pout, like they always have. You're talking about people who claim our president is illegitimate because he's black, who think they are persecuted for being Christian. These are not rational people- their entire world view is based on the fact that they don't like change. At all.

      Fuck them. If Americans sat around and waited for conservatives to accept people they view as "other" we'd still have drinking fountains labeled "colored" and black people would be forced to give up their seat on the bus so that I could sit my lily white ass could sit down.

      Please don't lecture LGBT people on the nature of conservatives, and don't pretend like we need their acceptance before we're granted rights. It's not true. It never has been.

      P.S. I am not a crackpot.

      by BoiseBlue on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 10:19:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  This attitude is what stops a lot of progress (0+ / 0-)

        in its tracks regardless of what side your on. Not that there should be a side to be on to begin with. #2 I was not lecturing anyone. If you let your anger close off discussion, you are just empowering the influences you are fighting against. Oh and by the way, I may be white and straight, but am an ugly white woman, so don't lecture me about discrimination. I get it from your group as well.

        •  Oh? (3+ / 0-)

          Lesbians routinely discriminate against you?

          P.S. I am not a crackpot.

          by BoiseBlue on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 10:31:14 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I get bs from all walks of life due to my looks. (0+ / 0-)

            So yeah, I get it from Lesbians too.

            •  Sorry to hear that (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Tonedevil, Lost and Found

              On the bright side, at least you can't be fired for being ugly, or denied the right to marry, or be refused housing, or any of the other thousands of rights that straight people have.

              And, you know, I have to point out that "ugly" is subjective, and I'm sorry that you describe yourself as that. I hope that someday you can get beyond that description and see whatever it is about you that makes you beautiful because everyone has that within them.

              Maybe you see yourself as ugly and imagine that everyone else does as well. In my experience that's what most people who describe themselves as "ugly" have a true problem with.

              Hope you have a good 2011. I really do hope you can describe yourself in more flattering terms someday.

              P.S. I am not a crackpot.

              by BoiseBlue on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 10:45:44 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  It is amazing... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tonedevil, psychodrew, BoiseBlue, Eddie L

        ...how so many straight people think that they have to educate us gay people as to how the world is, as if we've never experienced what it's like in this world for gay people.

        •  More amazing still that we're supposed to (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          psychodrew

          have sympathy for those poor, poor conservatives who just need us to hold their hands and get them through this frightening, frightening world where * gasp * THEY SEE GAY PEOPLE.

          P.S. I am not a crackpot.

          by BoiseBlue on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 11:06:50 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Its amazing how some gay people (0+ / 0-)

          assume that straight people haven't had any serious discrimination issues themselves.

          My comment was not meant as a lecture, but as a communication to let you know that there are conservative people out there trying to change.

          And you just spun that into a negative against gay people.  

          Also, I personally would rather work on equal rights for all, not just certain minorities of people. But hey, I'm not gay, so that means nothing right?
           

    •  Interesting exchange... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TBug

      i have to agree, somewhat, with both TBug and Boise Blue, and rec'd both, despite seeming contradictions in their perspectives, heh.

      A very large majority of the nation is still religious, unfortunately, and most of them are choking on the M word.

      This is sad and stupid, true, and incredibly annoying, to say the least, especially to the extent that it seeks to deny fundamental civil and human rights to "others".

      However, paradoxically, a very large majority of Americans, including the conservative religious right, even, strongly agree that gays should be afforded full civil and human rights.

      Go figure.  It's irrational, contradictory, weird, even, but there it is.

      To me, this means a genuinely fair and equitable universal government sanctioned Civil Partnership Contract, ensuring the fundamental rights of "marriage", but dropping the archaic throwback term that is so laden with religious connotations, would have a good chance of quick passage, even after the new Congress convenes.

      This is not about religion.  

      It's about whether a Civil Partner has fundamental equal social and economic spousal and "family" rights.

      The government has no business sanctifying a relationship, in the religious sense.  

      It's all about formally acknowledging a partnership contract, between the spouses, and with the government, in terms of taxes, insurance, retirement benefits, and other such aspects of daily family life.

      The religious part of it belongs to the individuals, and their churches, and is none of the government's business, as long as they are not engaging in illegal activities, and comply with the contractual obligations of a government recognized churches, say, heh.

      Anyway, I propose that we drop the freakin' M word altogether, and instead just demand a fair and reasonable social contract, that would apply to all spousal couples and families, regardless of race, sex, religion or whatever.  

      And just leave religion out of it, as strictly a personal matter, between the individuals and their god, church, or whatever.

      A lot more people these days are referring to their spouse as "My Partner", and I think that's really cool.  

      It doesn't EVEN get into the conventional master-slave meme of "wife" and "husband" in "marriage", under "god".

      Personally, I shudder at the M word, and all that it implies, historically, culturally, more in the negative than in the postitive, in many regards.  

      "Partners" seems much better...

      "...a printing press is worth 10,000 rifles..." Ho Chi Minh

      by Radical def on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 02:57:47 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Get to work! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Radical def

    Stop complaining about the personal opinion of the President.  Get to work.  Work on Congress.  Work on the public.  One man, even the President, won't get this done.

  •  obama is a politician, first and foremost... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Radical def

    have we not seen ample evidence of this fact?

    and i'm not saying this as a criticism of obama - it's like criticising a dog for scratching - it's in their nature

    anarchists are just so predictable

    by memofromturner on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 10:27:37 AM PST

  •  I understand your concern. (5+ / 0-)

    But seriously, even if it's just flipflopping to score political points, even if it's just seizing on a popular issue among young people to get re-elected, I think it'd be great for the President to come out in favor of marriage equality.

    It would show, at least, that we've worked hard enough and long enough to change SOCIETY that a politician sees this as a winning political issue.

    Yes, this issue is long overdue. Yes, constant changes with the wind are irritating. But yes, changes with the wind in our* favor IMO are worth celebrating.

    *those of us who work for equality in this area.

    On Sara Palin: "That woman...is an Idiot." -- Keith Olbermann

    by allergywoman on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 10:28:08 AM PST

    •  Good point. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Radical def, allergywoman

      I saw this somewhere, so I don't know to whom I should attribute this thought, but as someone once put it, "At least they pandering to us, instead of ignoring us, or running against us." That is a step in the right direction.

      I'm gay and I'm pissed. I'm not giving up, I'm not giving in, I'm not backing down, and I'm not going away. Deal with it.

      by psychodrew on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 11:18:43 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Obviously no "introspection" is involved (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Radical def

    what this actually tells me is that a couple of politicians (Biden and Obama) are approaching the conditions that will enable them to plausibly switch their views publicly to what they "really" are (most likely), without seeming to bend to LBGT activism as far as the public is concerned.  I predict Obama will change his official position after either being re-elected or losing, but not likely before unless the public's views continue to shift rather more dramatically in our favor than expected.  Nothing about this surprises or disappoints me, as I gather my views of all politicians (ours or theirs) are far more cynical than many apparently tender-hearted Kossacks.

  •  Depends whqat the meaning of "marriage" is (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    psychodrew, Radical def, varii

    The first example from 1996 does not show the wording of the question he was responding to, but the second does include that "wiggle" room on civil unions.

    the state should not interfere with same-gender couples who [choose] to marry and share fully and equally in the rights, responsibilities and commitment of civil marriage."

    I think the difficulty caused by the conflation of the legal vs the religious aspects of "marriage" is something a lot of people are grappling with, and trying to "evolve" an internally consistent view on.

  •  Two "dimensions" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Radical def, Hayate Yagami

    I remember once President Obama said it was difficult to reconcile gay marriage with his Christian faith.

    I'm a straight, Christian man -- like the President! and I don't find it difficult to reconcile faith and gay marriage.

    I see two "dimensions" in our society in regard to marriage: civil marriages and "religious" marriages (that is, civil marriages that are celebrated in churches).

    No church should ever be forced to celebrate gay marriages if it offends their faith.
    But civil marriages (like performed before a judge/official), pure and simple, are a civil right.

  •  Oh please. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Hayate Yagami

    Repeal of DADT nothwithstanding, I don't trust this President on GLBT issues.  Never have, not since McClurkin and the shameless pandering THAT involved.  He also knows who crossed the aisle to elect him (blue collar Rust Belt whites), and he dares not offend them...

    When do I get to vote on your marriage?

    by jarhead5536 on Fri Dec 24, 2010 at 12:34:12 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site