President Obama Endorses Gay Marriage

This doesn't seem a smart move.

Surely people would assume he was probably pro gay marriage before he said anything about it, and the people against it probably wouldn't have worried too much about it.

However, now he's announced this, he's risking upsetting a possibly large amount of voters for no reason really.
 
Nitefly said:
Really though, they should just get over it and let people do what they want to do. One view is limiting the freedom of another. The other view doesn't. Total no brainer as to which is the more reasonable of the two.
Click to expand...

Women are fertile at 12, why don't you also support child marriage which continues in various middle eastern countries and India? You are limiting the rights of Muslim paedophiles :p

Marriage is a cultural thing as well as something enshrined into law, it isn't just about equal rights, it's about making changes to a culture as well.
 
cu3ed said:
Their was no Tea Party when they voted Bush in for a second time.
Click to expand...
It's not really relevant, though. That was an election taking place whilst the country was reeling in the aftermath of 9/11, it was framed as a national security election. That's not the case today, and unless something bad happens, it probably won't be this November.
 
Obama may endorse changes to allow gay marriage, but will the house and senate allow federal law to be passed that would force all states to allow gay marriage? I know some states already allow civil partnerships, but what are the statistics on which states allow gay marriage?

I'm all for gay marriage to be made perfectly legal (as it should be) but I just think a lot of senators/congressman would try and stop any bill going through the senate/house as they still have to get elected every so often and it could kill their career to support it.
 
Robbo said:
This doesn't seem a smart move.

Surely people would assume he was probably pro gay marriage before he said anything about it, and the people against it probably wouldn't have worried too much about it.

However, now he's announced this, he's risking upsetting a possibly large amount of voters for no reason really.
Click to expand...

He has stated before that he was against gay marriage, but Americas changing, and he knows it. Most people were in favour of repealing 'Don't Ask Don't Tell', I suspect most will be in favour of gay marriage too.

Obama hasn't been liberal enough, so I'm glad he's come out and said this.
 
Longbow said:
He has stated before that he was against gay marriage, but Americas changing, and he knows it. Most people were in favour of repealing 'Don't Ask Don't Tell', I suspect most will be in favour of gay marriage too.

Obama hasn't been liberal enough, so I'm glad he's come out and said this.
Click to expand...


So you are glad that presidents cannot have opinions any more?

You want politicians to be spineless?

Interesting.
 
RomanNose said:
But it's a good change to culture.
Click to expand...
Essentially this is the unknown problem :(

On other forums I see a lot of posts about married people struggling with the issue of fancying other people, yet quite a number of people tell them to go for it if they are unhappy. Nobody seems to speak out for the values marriage is supposed to represent (like not shagging anyone you feel like).

To a kid, a marriage is a man and a woman and that's an easily understandable unit, they really have to be a bit older to understand that Bill and Ben share a bed.

It just seems like a pointless complication for what one group thinks is sacrosanct and the other group probably thinks is just a legal bit of paper.

LGBT groups aren't identifying with the religious implications, so why do they want the ceremony to sound the same?
Civil partnerships are the same thing, so I'd have to ask what was so awful about those.


Next step Polygamy?
 
Good news, interesting that now both the US and UK have leaders strongly in favour of gay marriage.

I think it's a bit of a gamble but I think you will see the Dems tie this in with Republican 'war on women' and casting the Repubs as socially backward obstructionists and that they are puppets for the extreme religious right. The social issues is a minefield and the Republicans want all the focus to be on the economy, the more the waters get muddied I can see the message moving away from the economy (which Romney/Repubs want) and towards social issues (which they do not want).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom