E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSOn Sunday, the New York Times examined the president’s position on gay marriage. “Now President Obama says his views on same-sex marriage are ‘evolving,’ and as he runs for re-election he is seeking support from gay donors who want to know where he stands. This week, he will headline a $1,250-a-plate ‘Gala with the Gay Community’ in Manhattan, his first such event as president; on June 29, he will host a Gay Pride reception at the White House. He is doing so at time when the New York Legislature is considering whether to make same-sex marriage legal — a vote that the president will no doubt be asked about while in New York.”
More: “The White House would not comment on whether Mr. Obama was ready to endorse same-sex marriage. But one Democratic strategist close to the White House, speaking only on the condition of anonymity, said some senior advisers ‘are looking at the tactics of how this might be done if the president chose to do it.’”
“The golf summit on Saturday may not have resolved the partisan argument over the deficit and the debt ceiling or the legality of the U.S. military operation in Libya. But some good came of it, at least for the victors,” the Washington Post says. “The bipartisan pairing of President Obama and House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) won the 18th hole and the match against Vice President Biden, thought to be the strongest player in the group, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R). To the winners go the spoils, in this case $2 each.”
In the New York Times, John Harwood writes that Obama’s “political culpability exceeds his economic culpability.”
Leave a Comment:
We had a gay pride parade in Portland this week that included more "straight"supporters than past marches, including area churches, families, and the mayor. I realize opposition to gay marriage is still strong in some quarters, but activists have done a great job of advocating for their civil rights. This is a case where policians are following the parade.
They sure have Sistahwoman! Gay folks have taken care of their own for the last quarter of century since Ronnie Ray-Gun could not say the word AIDS when his 'friend' Rock Hudson lay dying of the disease. They raised money to do so since their government had turned a blid eye and ear. Politicians march in the Chicago parade too nw; they didn't then.
Can you imagine Rick Perry on a float with a gaggle of bible thumpers tossing out conviction notices to the crowd. WAH-hahahahahaha! More like shoveling their version of their 'truth' down America's collective throats!
MMMMmmmm...Now, that's an oral argument I'll take a pass on. I don't call moral the argument to exclude certain groups thought by some in our society as undesirable; I definitely don't call it Christian. It is neither.
In actuality, since Christ himself hung out with that society's discards, I would think he would feel right at home with a gay married couple. He may even give them a special mission to teach others tolerance; Much like in the story of Zachias the tax collector, as unliked in those days as now, who climbed a sycamore tree just to catch a glimpse of the man. Jesus invited himself home with the tax man for dinner to teach TOLERANCE. It's in there... check it out!
And they call Mitt Romney a flip flopper?
Obama has deep moral views on this matter; his pollsters will soon tell him what is his latest moral position.
All Obama statements, and positions, come with an expiration date.
I attended an event for Senator Obama in 2008. On the issue of gay marriage he said he "personally" (and he stressed personally) felt a marriage should be between a man and woman. He went on to say that he didn't feel he should ever push his will, on this subject, to others. He also felt it was a state decision to make regarding marriage vs. civil unions.
If he has, in fact, evolved on the issue of marriage between a man and a woman, what IS the problem?
If there were never any evolution you'd be hanging from tree limbs, Bob.
If Obama dictated how WE all live based on everything according to what HE believes, his name would be Bush.
I kind of enjoy the tone of the article leaning toward the change of heart being just about buying votes. And its fun to know I'm more progressive on at least one issue than our President is. All politicians need to stay out of the marriage business. The only thing the feds need concern themselves with is what tax bracket filers fall into.
As for Obama's views on the subject...His views are changing as is America's. It is the slow way America learns what is right to do. (SEE civil rights; 1960's;) It took us a century to allow anyone other than a white male landowners of age (21) to vote. 100 years to give women, people of color and the young people who go fight our wars their inalienable God-given rights as defined in the constitution!
Let's hope the President (AND CONGRESS) doesn't allow yet another year of this century to pass before the RIGHT thing is done. We all need someone to walk through this life with; it is no one's business who that person is for each American.
Mr. President, please evolve quicker.
The man doesn't have an original thought in his head.
"Polls say...."
Panderer-in-Chief. What a joke.
That's right, Doug: "polls say...."
See, we have what you call a 'representative' form of government. HE is supposed to reperesent US. If polls say what 'US' wants, then, well......you see where this is going, right? And that is 'pandering'?? If the polls say "we want jobs", Obama should ignore those polls, too?
The issues of gay rights are tough to negotiate for this president. Has any one gone back to see what he said in his run for president. He's flipped on everything he said then. What makes us think he will be any more sincere now. Obama wants their votes, but as a one world order guy, and a muslim sympathizer, can't come right out and support gays. The muslims treat gays worse than they treat women. Their reasons are religious, not social.
I have to wonder why women's organizations will bash conservatives, but not muslims who give them no rights at all. No driving, speaking, socializing ... they even stone them with just an accusation. Publicly, without a fair trial. Is this the social justice you seek? I really don't see where gays fit into the social justice platform, under the open society Obama seeks. They will be outcasts. I don't say that to be mean, but I am a realist, and I listen to what they say, and watch what they do ... None of which is in support of gay people. The bigger problem is the mainstream media won't tell you the truth. or just won't report, period. Those who don't seek other sources for information are uninformed, and ignorant to reality.
Women earned their right by fighting, and then used their newfound rights to their benefit. Gays will/are doing the same thing. But no matter how much you try, you can't legislate a consience, religion or morality out of how people think. Why is it that everyone must know you are gay? Why must we "celebrate" gay pride ... I'm proud, and you don't care about my sexuality ... If it's awareness, you seek, your flamboyance is a deterant, not an endearment.
You really need to get out more, BBG! Your senseless diatribe belies your clearly personal feelings towards homosexuality. If you have issues that need to be addressed, this is not the forum.
The American Public is way ahead of even the President on this matter! We simply don't care anymore about Republican Social and Religious Hate! We have already moved on. The problems that we must confront don't include post-adolescent paranoia over proving one's masculinity! It's time to fix the problems 8 years of Bush have left us.