Obama's Evolving Opinion On Same-sex Marriage

[NYcarbineer]

If Gays are born Gay , are Pedophiles born that way to?

Possibly, but the State has a compelling interest in stopping pedophilia.

What's the compelling interest in denying gays the right to marry?

 

[LeftofLeft]

Same sex marriage supporters ought to feel offended. Obama should have taken a position of leadership early on and stood by it. What does this timing buy him???

 

[WillowTree]

Actually, I'm a pretty big fan of the system we've got.

You know - a Republic, not a Democracy. A system where we elect people who we think represent us - rather than a system where everything is decided by popular opinion.

well the system we have gives us the right to vote and States Rights,, you have to live with that, or move, or change the constitution.

What does that have to do with what we were talking about?

everything.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Obama and Romney just passed each other today,

on their way to different centuries.

 

[BDBoop]

Actually, I'm a pretty big fan of the system we've got.

You know - a Republic, not a Democracy. A system where we elect people who we think represent us - rather than a system where everything is decided by popular opinion.

well the system we have gives us the right to vote and States Rights,, you have to live with that, or move, or change the constitution.

What does that have to do with what we were talking about?

Nothing.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

No. They don't.

Yup. They can marry anyone of the opposite sex just like me. They can engage in whatever sexual activities they want, just like me. They cannot marry two people, just like I can't. There is no right they have that I do not have.

Therefore it is a matter of defining the purpose of marriage. It clearly is for the sake of the nuclear family. Gay marriage does nothing to enhance the value of marriage or society.

If they were straight, they'd be happy to marry anyone of the opposite sex, and we wouldn't even be having this discussion, derp.

May I call you Derp?

You may call me "my lord."

Nobody is prohibited from engaging in homosexual activities. Again, there is no compelling need for homosexual marriage. It is nothing more than a design for one segment to use the government as a means of promoting their own morals.

Separation of church and state and separation of sexuality and state; that is what we are about; always have been and always will be.

 

[BDBoop]

Yup. They can marry anyone of the opposite sex just like me. They can engage in whatever sexual activities they want, just like me. They cannot marry two people, just like I can't. There is no right they have that I do not have.

Therefore it is a matter of defining the purpose of marriage. It clearly is for the sake of the nuclear family. Gay marriage does nothing to enhance the value of marriage or society.

If they were straight, they'd be happy to marry anyone of the opposite sex, and we wouldn't even be having this discussion, derp.

May I call you Derp?

You may call me "my lord."

Nobody is prohibited from engaging in homosexual activities. Again, there is no compelling need for homosexual marriage. It is nothing more than a design for one segment to use the government as a means of promoting their own morals.

Separation of church and state and separation of sexuality and state; that is what we are about; always have been and always will be.

Thanks, Derp. Well, I just came to the realization you are stuck on stupid, and there's no reason for me to continue to attempt to get through to you.

Have a lovely evening.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

If they were straight, they'd be happy to marry anyone of the opposite sex, and we wouldn't even be having this discussion, derp.

May I call you Derp?

You may call me "my lord."

Nobody is prohibited from engaging in homosexual activities. Again, there is no compelling need for homosexual marriage. It is nothing more than a design for one segment to use the government as a means of promoting their own morals.

Separation of church and state and separation of sexuality and state; that is what we are about; always have been and always will be.

Thanks, Derp. Well, I just came to the realization you are stuck on stupid, and there's no reason for me to continue to attempt to get through to you.

Have a lovely evening.

So you're running with your tail between your legs? Probably the best you can do given the circumstances.

If we're for separation of church and state b/c we don't want other people's moral values imposed on us then why would we not have separation of other moral systems and state? You have not given me a compelling reason for gay marriage then b/c there is none. It is a ploy to superimpose one group's set of morals on to everybody. I'm not going to stand for it and neither should any citizen.

 

[Pheonixops]

Yeah, he got called on this one by Biden. It's hard for me not to think it was orchestrated, in my opinion he did it to firm up his base of support. I don't care about the issue, meaning that I am not against gay marriage. In fact I think that they should have a right to marry each other, especially when in North Carolina marriage to one's first cousin is still legal.
"Now, heterosexual marriage laws are pretty straightforward in North Carolina. In fact, things are so lenient that, In North Carolina, it's completely legal for first cousins to get married ("Double Cousin" marriage, however, isn't okay... Whatever that is). "

That's a good looking dog you have there.

Thank you!

 

[Pheonixops]

Yeah, he got called on this one by Biden. It's hard for me not to think it was orchestrated, in my opinion he did it to firm up his base of support. I don't care about the issue, meaning that I am not against gay marriage. In fact I think that they should have a right to marry each other, especially when in North Carolina marriage to one's first cousin is still legal.
"Now, heterosexual marriage laws are pretty straightforward in North Carolina. In fact, things are so lenient that, In North Carolina, it's completely legal for first cousins to get married ("Double Cousin" marriage, however, isn't okay... Whatever that is). "

Gays have the same exact rights of heterosexuals. What they are trying to do is put the government stamp of approval on their lifestyle choices. There's zero compelling need for it.

I will agree that as individuals they do, but as couples they don't. Do they have the right to be married? Are they afforded the same rights as married couples? I don't think that they are trying to get a "stamp of approval", I think that they simply want to be afforded the same rights as heterosexual couples.

 

[Pheonixops]

You must have missed it:

Obama supports gay marriage: Historic switch carries risks - CSMonitor.com

And again, Obama shows that he would rather be a King than an executive that regards the will of the people. Thirty states have already banned government recognized gay marriage.

Wow, I guess old wingnut line has expired, temporarily, you know,

the one where they praise someone who doesn't just stick a finger in the wind and go whichever way the polls go.

Do you idiots ever get tired, I mean, day after day struggling so hard to be on the opposite side of everything Obama does or doesn't do?

That's the neo-con faux conservative way. Just look at or listen to hannity or limbugh. They are a bunch of fake, phoney, frauds. In short, they are a bunch of hypocrites who are full of shit and they lead their dullard followers into following the party line.

 

[mudwhistle]

Obama and Romney just passed each other today,

on their way to different centuries.

Only reason you're saying that is because you didn't hear what he said or you weren't listening.

He changed nothing other than saying he will tolerate same-sex marriage.

His stance didn't change because he's not gonna bother with trying to pass a federal law that supports it.

He said he'll leave it up to the states.......which is pretty much the same as saying "Present".

Romney said he was against it but he wouldn't try to stop it from passing in state governments. He's gonna leave it up to the voters.

 

[Greenbeard]

His stance didn't change because he's not gonna bother with trying to pass a federal law that supports it.

Federalizing marriage laws is the right's preferred approach, no?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

His stance didn't change because he's not gonna bother with trying to pass a federal law that supports it.

Federalizing marriage laws is the right's preferred approach, no?

He was against gay marriage as a state senator; so it's a lie that his stance has not changed anyways.

 

[mudwhistle]

And again, Obama shows that he would rather be a King than an executive that regards the will of the people. Thirty states have already banned government recognized gay marriage.

Wow, I guess old wingnut line has expired, temporarily, you know,

the one where they praise someone who doesn't just stick a finger in the wind and go whichever way the polls go.

Do you idiots ever get tired, I mean, day after day struggling so hard to be on the opposite side of everything Obama does or doesn't do?

That's the neo-con faux conservative way. Just look at or listen to hannity or limbugh. They are a bunch of fake, phoney, frauds. In short, they are a bunch of hypocrites who are full of shit and they lead their dullard followers into following the party line.

Actually that's the way the left is. We have our principles and Democrats know what they are and they try to invent issues to attack those principles.

Some of them don't even believe what they're saying when they attack us, but that doesn't stop them from lying about it. Joe Biden doesn't really respect Gays or think they're special.....but if he wants to go along for the ride he has to carrying Obama's water on the issue.

 

[mudwhistle]

Obama hasn't changed his stance privately.....just publicly.

The same advisers told the Post that Obama would make the decision based on his gut, but that is an insulting way to refer to the vice president. There is no evidence that Obama planned to speak until Joe Biden said last weekend that he was for gay “marriage” and forced the issue.

In fact, Obama has not “evolved”—he has changed his position whenever his political fortunes required him to do so. Running for the Illinois state senate from a trendy area of Chicago in 1996, he was for gay marriage. “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages,” he wrote in answer to a questionnaire back then. In 2004, he was running for the U.S. Senate and needed to appeal to voters statewide. So he evolved, and favored civil unions but opposed homosexual “marriage.” In 2008, running for president, he said, “I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage.” Now in 2012, facing a tough reelection campaign where he needs energized supporters of gay “marriage” and has disappointed them with his refusal to give them his support, he is for it. To paraphrase John Kerry, he was for it before he was against it before he was for it again. ‘On My Behalf’ | The Weekly Standard

 

[The Rabbi]

Romney, standing firm.

Romney, responding to Obama’s shift, reaffirmed his opposition to same-sex marriage. “When these issues were raised in my state of Massachusetts, I indicated my view, which is I do not favor marriage between people of the same gender, and I do not favor civil unions if they are identical to marriage other than by name,” he said in an interview with a Fox affiliate in Denver. “My view is the domestic partnership benefits, hospital visitation rights, and the like are appropriate but that the others are not.”

I'll bet you think he contradicted himself.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Obama hasn't changed his stance privately.....just publicly.

The same advisers told the Post that Obama would make the decision based on his gut, but that is an insulting way to refer to the vice president. There is no evidence that Obama planned to speak until Joe Biden said last weekend that he was for gay “marriage” and forced the issue.

In fact, Obama has not “evolved”—he has changed his position whenever his political fortunes required him to do so. Running for the Illinois state senate from a trendy area of Chicago in 1996, he was for gay marriage. “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages,” he wrote in answer to a questionnaire back then. In 2004, he was running for the U.S. Senate and needed to appeal to voters statewide. So he evolved, and favored civil unions but opposed homosexual “marriage.” In 2008, running for president, he said, “I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage.” Now in 2012, facing a tough reelection campaign where he needs energized supporters of gay “marriage” and has disappointed them with his refusal to give them his support, he is for it. To paraphrase John Kerry, he was for it before he was against it before he was for it again. ‘On My Behalf’ | The Weekly Standard

Need a damn score card to keep up with what he stands for.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Oh Papa Obama is evolving but it has nothing to do
with gay marriage. The gay marriage thing is just a flip flop
but the MSM and the Left don't want to call it that,,,,


No doubt if he wins a 2nd term
The real him might just pop out

The Left and the MSM just want to play the "centrist" act again,
long enough to get him elected

 

[rightwinger]

Most Americans views on gay marriage have evolved

15 years ago, you would be laughed at for even suggesting it

Even Dick Cheney supports it