U.S. President Barack Obama Says 'Same-Sex Marriage Should Be Legal'

[Jingthing]

President Obama's position a refreshing contrast to his opponent, Mr. Romney:

Mitt Romney — who suppports rolling back gay rights and a constitutional amendment against gay marriage, and who failed to defend openly gay adviser Ric Grenell against attacks from the right — may now be forced into a culture war footing.

http://www.washingto...1IeDU_blog.html

Romney also being a prominent Mormon who gives 10 percent of his income (tax deductible as if he needs the break) to the Mormon church, calling it "charity" when it is actually mandated by doctrine, an organization that has actively worked to fight gay civil rights equality, most notably in California.

Yes, the lines are indeed drawn.

Edited May 10, 2012 by Scott

[Steely Dan]

He was for gay marriage in 1996 when running for the Illinois Senate.

He was against gay marriage in 2004 when running for the US Senate.

He was against gay marriage in 2008 when running for the Presidency.

Now he is for it again in 2012.

Yeah, sure, he has the strength of a bowl of Jello, which also wobbles in the wind.

Sadly but predictably I detect that the canonization of the human weather vane has started apace in both the press and the blogosphere based on the 2012 wind direction as oppose to the 2004 and 8 positions. Don't get me wrong, I'm personally in favour of gay marriage, but not in favour of the issue being cynically used as a political football by someone whose proclamations on the issue vary. I do admit it is a cynical an astute move as credit can be taken in the states that adopt gay marriage legislation whilst blame can be apportioned elsewhere in states that do not.

Finally, if this is the position of the U.S head of state I hope it is commended to other Countries with (ahem) different views on gay marriage.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed.

[Jingthing]

He was for gay marriage in 1996 when running for the Illinois Senate.

He was against gay marriage in 2004 when running for the US Senate.

He was against gay marriage in 2008 when running for the Presidency.

Now he is for it again in 2012.

Yeah, sure, he has the strength of a bowl of Jello, which also wobbles in the wind.

Sadly but predictably I detect that the canonization of the human weather vane has started apace in both the press and the blogosphere based on the 2012 wind direction as oppose to the 2004 and 8 positions. Don't get me wrong, I'm personally in favour of gay marriage, but not in favour of the issue being cynically used as a political football by someone whose proclamations on the issue vary. I do admit it is a cynical an astute move as credit can be taken in the states that adopt gay marriage legislation whilst blame can be apportioned elsewhere in states that do not.

Finally, if this is the position of the U.S head of state I hope it is commended to other Countries with (ahem) different views on gay marriage.

Even though Obama was pressured into finally coming out on this issue, it is still an incredibly risky position to take going into a tight election in a bad economy. I 100 percent reject the idea he has done this in order to make his reelection more likely. In fact, it makes his reelection less likely. Personally, I would have rather that he wasn't pushed in his first term to do this thing we all know he would do anyway in his second term if he gets it, that he gets reelected, and then is in a position to make a real difference with supreme court picks. This stance done before election is more brave though, again even though pushed, he still did it, and he didn't have to. It will also be seen as more brave by historians when the story is told of the ultimate success of the gay equality civil rights movement in America (whether he wins or loses). Edited May 10, 2012 by Jingthing

[chuckd]

He was for gay marriage in 1996 when running for the Illinois Senate.

He was against gay marriage in 2004 when running for the US Senate.

He was against gay marriage in 2008 when running for the Presidency.

Now he is for it again in 2012.

Yeah, sure, he has the strength of a bowl of Jello, which also wobbles in the wind.

Sadly but predictably I detect that the canonization of the human weather vane has started apace in both the press and the blogosphere based on the 2012 wind direction as oppose to the 2004 and 8 positions. Don't get me wrong, I'm personally in favour of gay marriage, but not in favour of the issue being cynically used as a political football by someone whose proclamations on the issue vary. I do admit it is a cynical an astute move as credit can be taken in the states that adopt gay marriage legislation whilst blame can be apportioned elsewhere in states that do not.

Finally, if this is the position of the U.S head of state I hope it is commended to other Countries with (ahem) different views on gay marriage.

Even though Obama was pressured into finally coming out on this issue, it is still an incredibly risky position to take going into a tight election in a bad economy. I 100 percent reject the idea he has done this in order to make his reelection more likely. In fact, it makes his reelection less likely. Personally, I would have rather that he wasn't pushed in his first term to do this thing we all know he would do anyway in his second term if he gets it, that he gets reelected, and then is in a position to make a real difference with supreme court picks. This stance done before election is more brave though, again even though pushed, he still did it, and he didn't have to. It will also be seen as more brave by historians when the story is told of the ultimate success of the gay equality civil rights movement in America (whether he wins or loses).

Maybe his decision was financial. His campaign raised $1 million within an hour after he returned to the 1996 position.

Edit in: Just read a funny quote from Charles Krauthammer..."Well it's surely the first time in scientific history that evolution has been accelerated by an upcoming election."

Edited May 10, 2012 by chuckd

[Jingthing]

Yes, the money thing was a plus but bottom line we knew all along he was pro gay civil rights and we also know the passion opponents of them are able to stir up. Right wingers have been using demonization of gays to win American elections for decades now as a transparent tactic. Some day that will turn against them but at this point in history, the tide is still in process of turning.

[bigbamboo]

Same sex marriage has to be a vote loser in Alabamy. Same family marriage might be a winner though!

Edited May 10, 2012 by bigbamboo

[DP25]

President Obama's position a refreshing contrast to his opponent, Mr. Romney:

Mitt Romney — who suppports rolling back gay rights and a constitutional amendment against gay marriage, and who failed to defend openly gay adviser Ric Grenell against attacks from the right — may now be forced into a culture war footing.

http://www.washingto...1IeDU_blog.html

Romney also being a prominent Mormon who gives 10 percent of his income (tax deductible as if he needs the break) to the Mormon church, calling it "charity" when it is actually mandated by doctrine, an organization that has actively worked to fight gay civil rights equality, most notably in California.

Yes, the lines are indeed drawn.

Obama now has official campaign advertisements pointing out his position compared to Romney. I've never been a big fan of Obama, he's always come across as just another weasely politician to me, but I'm quite pleased to see him take this risky position prior to an election

[media=]

[/media]

[Jingthing]

Speaking of President Obama's opponent, Mr. Romney, surprise surprise, it turns out he was rather an anti-gay BULLY as a teenager. Not too surprising considering the famous dog strapped to the roof story.

As a teenager, he apparently saw a kid who didn’t conform to his idea of normal and went after him, cruelly, methodically, and aggressively. It’s not surprising that Romney would have been a straight-laced, by-the-book kind of student who policed gender norms, to use the parlance of our time. But it is surprising that he was such a jerk about it.

http://www.slate.com...gton_post_.html

Edited May 10, 2012 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

Typical liberal nonsense - making a mountain out of a molehill. Romney only bothered this guy once and no one knew that he was gay. It was one cruel incident in high school. How many of us never did anything stupid in our whole lives?

[flying]

Typical liberal nonsense - making a mountain out of a molehill. Romney only bothered this guy once and no one knew that he was gay. It was one cruel incident in high school. How many of us never did anything stupid in our whole lives?

While I said I could care less who marries who.....this which you point out does bother me.

Because in this country...USA.... we are at a major point & need to be discussing real issues that threaten to collapse

this country.

Instead presidential elections will yet again be reduced to these kinds of things.

It is too bad the candidates & especially the main stream media cannot stick to discussing

things that have the greatest impact NOW on this country which is is so much trouble.

Yet instead they will focus on things like this....what happened in high school.....how do they treat their dogs....

Never any pertinent questions for the most part. Really makes one wonder where is the focus these days

Like Koheesti said........

Government should not have to legalize gay marriage because they should not be in the marriage business anyway. The only reason they are in it in the first place is to raise revenue from selling marriage licenses.

Edited May 10, 2012 by flying

[geriatrickid]

Typical liberal nonsense - making a mountain out of a molehill. Romney only bothered this guy once and no one knew that he was gay. It was one cruel incident in high school. How many of us never did anything stupid in our whole lives?

Once that we know about. Sorry, but this is a revealing incident. The people making the statements are all respectable pillars of their community

I suggest a closer reading of the original Washington Post article is required. http://www.washingto...ry.html?hpid=z4

Bullies rarely stop being bullies. Sure, they can tone it down, but its a character trait that stays with a person. The fact of the matter is that most people are not bullies and have no similar events in their past. We all do stupid things, but most people do not physically assault others in the manner in which Romney did. I suggest a broader review of Mitt's behaviour over the years will reveal a disturbing character trait, even though its masked by public niceties and such.

There is a distinct contrast here. President Obama showed some backbone in his statement, whilst Mr. Romney's position is motivated by the unknown. Is Mr. Romney motivated by fear, by hate. by ignorance, by his religious beliefs or is it a genuine sentiment? If it was genuine, I can respect Mr. Romney's position. However, Mr. Romney wants to legislate his position, i.e. force his view on others. President Obama has not stated that he wishes to legislate his view, and has acknowledged that this is a state jurisdiction.

For those that fear the intrusion of the government into personal lives, they should be concerned by the Romney position as he wants a constitutional amendment to forbid same sex unions. Mr. Obama wants the state out of the bedroom. Anyone that claims to be a libertarian or in favour of less government must appreciate the President's position, even if they are personally opposed to same sex unions. With his statement, the President has taken a very clear stand on less government interference in the personal lives of US citizens, and that should be lauded as a good thing, especially by the tea party members that argue for less government.

Edited May 11, 2012 by geriatrickid

[tomwct]

Obama is a typical Left Wing Socialist Politician!!! He will be anything that favors getting a vote, but Biden forced him into this!!! That's one of the best things Biden has done as a VP!!! Only a short 6 months both of them will be packing their bags and the dollar will start returning some value!!! God Bless America!!!

[Ulysses G.]

Once that we know about. Sorry, but this is a revealing incident. The people making the statements are all respectable pillars of their community

I suggest a closer reading of the original Washington Post article is required. http://www.washingto...ry.html?hpid=z4

I read the entire article and there was only this one incident and the rest of the article makes him sound like a good kid. I have no idea how you can condemn the man on the basis of one cruel childhood prank.

[GentlemanJim]

Obama is a typical Left Wing Socialist Politician!!! He will be anything that favors getting a vote, but Biden forced him into this!!! That's one of the best things Biden has done as a VP!!! Only a short 6 months both of them will be packing their bags and the dollar will start returning some value!!! God Bless America!!!

If you think that the dollar is where it is because of Obama and Biden and that it would recover because Romney gets in you have absolutely no grasp on global economics.

[geriatrickid]

Obama is a typical Left Wing Socialist Politician!!! He will be anything that favors getting a vote, but Biden forced him into this!!! That's one of the best things Biden has done as a VP!!! Only a short 6 months both of them will be packing their bags and the dollar will start returning some value!!! God Bless America!!!

Sure. If you think these guys are "typical left wing socialists" I suggest you get out more and travel the world and see what a real left wing socialist is.

By your standards, Conservative PMs Cameron and Harper must be roaring commies.

[Koratpat]

That's kind of a low blow. You don't have to be gay to know the obvious. The majority of Americans are pro gay marriage rights (by a slim margin) but the majority of YOUNGER Americans are for for them by a LARGE majority. So it is clear and obvious this civil rights battle will be won in time and the only question now is how much time. Just as the bigots who supported banning interracial marriage were on the wrong side of history, so are the bigots today opposed full first class citizenship for gay Americans. The U.S. system is a SLOW system and the laws are almost always well behind the public.

BTW, I don't know if Shephard is gay or not, nor do I care (as he's not my type).

The majority of Americans are pro gay marriage rights

That is laughable. I do not know own person in the US that is for it. No one hates them for being gay. What is disliked is the constant in your face aggressive, gay agenda. No one I know in the US wants the schools introducing it to students, nor do they want to see anyone marching around at their parades in g-strings and miniskirts waving rainbow flags. There is no need for the shock jock attention whoring. Straight people do not go marching about for normal marriage.

Edited May 11, 2012 by Koratpat

[Gary A]

A tempest in a teapot. What difference does it make? Gays have as much right to go through a divorce and be as miserable as anyone else. In the US, men traditionally get the short end of the stick in a divorce court. Gay divorces will be interesting.

[Yunla]

IMO Romney has the edge in the sense that he hasn't yet been in office, and voters often "vote out" old leaders rather than "vote in" new leaders. He can also play the economic responsibility card, which will go well with the large number of people who think Obama played recklessly with the economy. I think Romney's chances are improved with Obama's announcement this week. A lot of black voters who backed Obama are devout believers in the Bible, and may feel he has crossed a line they will not follow him over.

To me the whole thing is ridiculous, I can't believe they're still talking about gay relationships when theres so many real problems in the world, such as environmental decimation & desease / poverty.

[kerryk]

Forty-four states currently ban gay marriage. Under Obama millions of Americans in most states will continue be denied the right to marry the person of their choice.

From, Obama's gay marriage head fake.

[chuckd]

Read this and tell me it wasn't about the money:

____________________________________________________

Clooney's Obama fundraiser gets gay marriage boost

By PATRICK GAVIN | 5/10/12 1:33 PM EDT

Although the White House admitted that Vice President Joe Biden’s comments Sunday in support of gay marriage forced President Barack Obama’s hand, the timing was perfect in at least one regard: A fundraiser tonight at George Clooney’s Los Angeles home will be much friendlier.

“At the beginning of the week, there was this potential for some awkward moments because this fundraiser actually is so small,” said Ted Johnson, the deputy editor of Variety magazine and a longtime observer of the Washington-Hollywood nexus. “They’re designed to actually give the people who are paying $40,000 a piece some face time with the president or to at least have a Q&A. And I think because of what Biden said, this raised the possibility that someone was going to ask him about his position.”

Several of the attendees at Clooney’s fundraiser — including the actor himself — have spoken in favor of gay marriage. Filmmaker Rob Reiner, a board member of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, is helping to finance an effort to legalize same-sex marriage in the state, said Johnson.

Read more: http://www.politico....l#ixzz1uWruJJnH

[GentlemanJim]

A tempest in a teapot. What difference does it make? Gays have as much right to go through a divorce and be as miserable as anyone else. In the US, men traditionally get the short end of the stick in a divorce court. Gay divorces will be interesting.

A very valid point and one which could eventually skew statistics because for once when there is a divorce we can be assured a man is going to win

Edited May 11, 2012 by Scott
formatting

[Jingthing]

That's kind of a low blow. You don't have to be gay to know the obvious. The majority of Americans are pro gay marriage rights (by a slim margin) but the majority of YOUNGER Americans are for for them by a LARGE majority. So it is clear and obvious this civil rights battle will be won in time and the only question now is how much time. Just as the bigots who supported banning interracial marriage were on the wrong side of history, so are the bigots today opposed full first class citizenship for gay Americans. The U.S. system is a SLOW system and the laws are almost always well behind the public.

BTW, I don't know if Shephard is gay or not, nor do I care (as he's not my type).

The majority of Americans are pro gay marriage rights

That is laughable. I do not know own person in the US that is for it. No one hates them for being gay. What is disliked is the constant in your face aggressive, gay agenda. No one I know in the US wants the schools introducing it to students, nor do they want to see anyone marching around at their parades in g-strings and miniskirts waving rainbow flags. There is no need for the shock jock attention whoring. Straight people do not go marching about for normal marriage.

Polls are showing this. 50 percent or a little over 50 percent. By definition, that's a slim majority, as I did state. Just because you hang out with an intolerant set of people proves nothing.

Straight people are already first class US citizens. Gay people don't have that status yet.

http://global.christianpost.com/news/half-of-all-americans-support-gay-marriage-protestants-most-resistant-74616/

[Jingthing]

Forty-four states currently ban gay marriage. Under Obama millions of Americans in most states will continue be denied the right to marry the person of their choice.

From, Obama's gay marriage head fake.

Yes, he isn't advancing any new legislation but remember he opposes the right wing's attempt at a federal constitutional amendment banning gay marriage recognition and also with a second term he may get some new SCOTUS picks.

He is also showing leadership regarding federal enforcement policies of current law when it touches on gay issues, such as spousal rights in immigration.

Comparing to any republican, the party that has been disgustingly hateful of gay people's civil rights.

Edited May 11, 2012 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

IMO Romney has the edge in the sense that he hasn't yet been in office, and voters often "vote out" old leaders rather than "vote in" new leaders. He can also play the economic responsibility card, which will go well with the large number of people who think Obama played recklessly with the economy. I think Romney's chances are improved with Obama's announcement this week. A lot of black voters who backed Obama are devout believers in the Bible, and may feel he has crossed a line they will not follow him over.

To me the whole thing is ridiculous, I can't believe they're still talking about gay relationships when theres so many real problems in the world, such as environmental decimation & desease / poverty.

Yeah, I guess Rosa Parks shouldn't have sat in the front of the bus. Put yourself in the shoes of your fellow citizens who are denied the same basic civil rights that you are.

[Jingthing]

Once that we know about. Sorry, but this is a revealing incident. The people making the statements are all respectable pillars of their community

I suggest a closer reading of the original Washington Post article is required. http://www.washingto...ry.html?hpid=z4

I read the entire article and there was only this one incident and the rest of the article makes him sound like a good kid. I have no idea how you can condemn the man on the basis of one cruel childhood prank.

It wasn't just one incident. Also, it takes a real bully to cut off the kid's hair. Remembering my childhood, yes I was bullied and I knew of the worse bullies, they were a small minority of students. Romney would have been one of them.

Romney as an adult. Eating up companies and laying off thousands of workers. And so it goes. You want someone like that to be president? Really?

Edited May 11, 2012 by Jingthing

[chuckd]

Forty-four states currently ban gay marriage. Under Obama millions of Americans in most states will continue be denied the right to marry the person of their choice.

From, Obama's gay marriage head fake.

Yes, he isn't advancing any new legislation but remember he opposes the right wing's attempt at a federal constitutional amendment banning gay marriage recognition and also with a second term he may get some new SCOTUS picks.

He is also showing leadership regarding federal enforcement policies of current law when it touches on gay issues, such as spousal rights in immigration.

Comparing to any republican, the party that has been disgustingly hateful of gay people's civil rights.

My post is intended to ask a question about your statement that..."He is also showing leadership regarding federal enforcement policies of current law when it touches on gay issues, such as spousal rights in immigration."

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is the law of the land yet Obama refuses to enforce it and even worse, violates his oath of office by refusing to defend it before the Supreme Court.

The DOMA was passed by the US Senate by a vote of 85-14 and a vote of 342-67 in the House. This bill, unlike the Obamacare legislation, was really passed overwhelmingly.

How is violating one's oath of office showing leadership?

[kerryk]

IMO Romney has the edge in the sense that he hasn't yet been in office, and voters often "vote out" old leaders rather than "vote in" new leaders. He can also play the economic responsibility card, which will go well with the large number of people who think Obama played recklessly with the economy. I think Romney's chances are improved with Obama's announcement this week. A lot of black voters who backed Obama are devout believers in the Bible, and may feel he has crossed a line they will not follow him over.

To me the whole thing is ridiculous, I can't believe they're still talking about gay relationships when theres so many real problems in the world, such as environmental decimation & desease / poverty.

Yeah, I guess Rosa Parks shouldn't have sat in the front of the bus. Put yourself in the shoes of your fellow citizens who are denied the same basic civil rights that you are.

I agree with you. But Forty-four states currently ban gay marriage. Under Obama millions of Americans in most states will continue be denied the right to marry the person of their choice. No excuse. If Rosa Parks can sit in the front of the bus the least Obama can do is to let gays to the front of the Chapel.

[kerryk]

Forty-four states currently ban gay marriage. Under Obama millions of Americans in most states will continue be denied the right to marry the person of their choice.

From, Obama's gay marriage head fake.

Yes, he isn't advancing any new legislation but remember he opposes the right wing's attempt at a federal constitutional amendment banning gay marriage recognition and also with a second term he may get some new SCOTUS picks.

He is also showing leadership regarding federal enforcement policies of current law when it touches on gay issues, such as spousal rights in immigration.

Comparing to any republican, the party that has been disgustingly hateful of gay people's civil rights.

My post is intended to ask a question about your statement that..."He is also showing leadership regarding federal enforcement policies of current law when it touches on gay issues, such as spousal rights in immigration."

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is the law of the land yet Obama refuses to enforce it and even worse, violates his oath of office by refusing to defend it before the Supreme Court.

The DOMA was passed by the US Senate by a vote of 85-14 and a vote of 342-67 in the House. This bill, unlike the Obamacare legislation, was really passed overwhelmingly.

How is violating one's oath of office showing leadership?

You gotta look at the big picture Chuck. There is a bigger law out there than the will of the majority of Americans. It is called, Political Correctness and it trumps silly little things like Democracy or the will of the people.

[koheesti]

Right wingers have been using demonization of gays to win American elections for decades now as a transparent tactic.

Are you blissfully ignorant that Obama himself was against gay marriage in his last election?

It just might be the American Left that thinks this is a great move by Obama. Here is the opinion of a far left Facebook friend of mine who is British...

"why is it that everyone over the pond is so 'proud' of Obama for finally condoning gay marriage after going on record for 8 years stating otherwise, in an election year? And you're proud? Wake up and smell the coffee sheeple."

It's the FIRST thing we've agreed on in years.

Edited May 11, 2012 by koheesti