LGBT
Related: About this forumThank you, President Obama.
Today, I witnessed a transformative presidency.
I have waited decades for a moment like this and I intend to savor it.
The most powerful institutions on the planet have aligned themselves against us and the president has crossed the line to stand with us. That fills me with emotion.
For me, this is a great day. It couldn't have come at a better time.
William769
(55,124 posts)He's still for States rights on the issue. Doesn't cut it with me.
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)He would still be defending DOMA in the courts.
William769
(55,124 posts)"The president stressed that this is a personal position, and that he still supports the concept of states' deciding the issue on their own."
http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/president-obama-affirms-his-support-for-same-sex-marriage.html
So are you saying he speaks with a forked tongue? Or your just better at describing what what he is thinking than himself?
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)When DOMA is overthrown, the Full Faith and Credit clause kicks in, like it always should have. States can decide not to issue marriage licences all they want. They will still have to honor the marriages from other states.
http://whenobamaendorsed.tumblr.com/post/22729202583/when-obama-endorsed-same-sex-marriage
William769
(55,124 posts)States rights and he would not be President today. Forcefulness goes a long way, just ask LBJ it was one of his definig moments.
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)Do you go to the federal government to get a marriage license or to the state government? Marriage is a matter for the states to work out...
Until DOMA falls. Not defending DOMA means the way will open for the federal government to force states to treat all marriages equally. This is happening.
Give yourself 24 hours to celebrate, William.
http://whenobamaendorsed.tumblr.com/post/22736863502/when-obama-endorsed-same-sex-marriage
William769
(55,124 posts)Your not going to smoke up my ass, it's been done enough already.
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)So if an interracial couple was able to obtain one, they got it from a state that allowed it. And many did.
It was the Supreme Court that declared the laws banning interracial marriage illegal. It may take the Supreme Court in this case as well. And overthrowing DOMA is the way to accomplish that, and the Obama administration refusing to defend DOMA in court hastens this process along.
http://whenobamaendorsed.tumblr.com/post/22728735168/when-obama-endorsed-same-sex-marriage
xchrom
(108,903 posts)the reality is.
the reality is as long as it's a states rights matter -- we are not equal citizens.
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)xchrom
(108,903 posts)made up dreams isn't reality.
you're peddling shit as far i'm concerned.
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)I think I'm up to that task.
http://whenobamaendorsed.tumblr.com/post/22731612225/when-obama-endorsed-same-sex-marriage
xchrom
(108,903 posts)Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)I've not done or said anything to suggest you must think any other way but how you think. All I can do is present my reasons for the way I think which you are free to do with as you will.
It's a beautiful day.
http://whenobamaendorsed.tumblr.com/post/22744530717/when-obama-endorsed-same-sex-marriage
xchrom
(108,903 posts)the day? meh.
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)Not gonna.
Maven
(10,533 posts)Hence the name of their landmark case.
It was getting tense until I got to your post. Thanks
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)How about inter-racial marriage? How about racial equality? Is that best left up to the states also?
Or is it just LGBT rights that should be voted on by the majority?
You do realize that he said it should be left up to the states the day after yet another state banned equality by constitutional amendment right?
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)Thank you for only quoting and responding to part of my post.
http://whenobamaendorsed.tumblr.com/post/22727566947/when-obama-endorsed-same-sex-marriage
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)It's a view I find disgusting and offensive.
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)will force states to recognize the marriages of others?
I don't. I actually quite love it.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)It's getting your marriage recognized in YOUR state so that you have the benefits afforded to heterosexual married couples. Additionally, without a federal ruling/law stating favor for marriage equality, the federal government is under no obligation to recognize non-heterosexual marriages in ANY state. Non-heterosexual married couples will still lose out on the rights and benefits afforded to heterosexual married couples notwithstanding those they have or will get by separate, non-complete decrees.
As to the issue at hand today, the statement by the president was landmark and important. It has never been done before, not even close. This is huge! We now have a person in a singularly large position of power and authority, who is also the de facto head of the Democratic Party, in an election year voicing support for marriage equality. A lot can be done using his clout to further LGBT equality and it needs to begin now, on day one!
Providing benefits to White House staff, telling the US AG to stop enforcing Section 3 of DOMA, and eventually, begrudgingly removing DADT, are all steps in the right direction. However, they are not complete victories. We do not yet have marriage equality in this nation for all of our citizens. Until that day, he, in his privileged position, MUST act on our behalf for this statement today to be as successful as it could be.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Which still leaves Section 2... the "states rights" one.
Section 2. Powers reserved to the states
No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.
Section 3. Definition of marriage
In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act#Text
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)All parts of it.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)It is a bizarre painful game. Acknowledging civil rights in regards to the Federal sector (.001% of the population maybe?) and denying that those civil rights are guaranteed by the Constitution.
Obama acknowledges the dignity of marriage equality but not the actual right of marriage equality.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)IT would allow the FEderal government ot recognize ssm, but not require any state to do so.
Duncan Grant
(8,257 posts)Feel free to appreciate this moment in history as you choose.
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)Maven
(10,533 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)Duncan Grant
(8,257 posts)My own coming out (liberation -- if you will) was a process.
It was a process for my friends and family, too.
Today was a monumental day in LGBT history; an important day in the process of equality. I'm choosing to appreciate the moment.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)But now we need to figure out how we are going to obtain and protect our rights in individual states.
The best thing might be for us all to move to the states that are more LGBT friendly, like Washington and Vermont, so we can prevent the bigots from passing more amendments preventing us from ever obtaining our rights.
This seems pretty unreasonable, I know. But how are we ever going to obtain our rights if this is left up to individual states? Mississippi sure won't be passing any LGBT friendly laws any time soon.
There's a whole lot of religious/other bigots out there.
Duncan Grant
(8,257 posts)DADT will be the new cornerstone for advocating our equality (and President Obama was smart to frame his argument in those terms).
I'm not sure what the long-term strategy will be with Mississippi. We still have racism and sexism in abundance all over the country. I'm not telling you anything you don't already know. So, the road is still long. We've always know this.
Today, I think we are witnessing the last dying gasps of the rabid, ugliest, variants of homophobia. I've lived long enough to see this change, and I appreciate it. To me, it's a marvel.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)But this states rights thing, it's no good.
A minority, especially one like our LGBT minority that has experienced centuries of institutionalized bigotry against it, should not be subject to the whims of a majority culture that has already been persecuting LGBT persons for centuries. We're sitting ducks for the bigots that infest most states.
President Obama has unquestionably, hands down, been the most LGBT friendly President in history by a country mile. And this was only one term. Given this trajectory, it seems probable that we may finally be recognized as first class citizens with legally protected equal rights by the end of his second term.
Two of the fascist justices on the SCOTUS are in their mid-70's. Scalia is 76, and Kennedy is 75. With any luck, one or both will be forced to leave the bench due to natural causes during Obama's 2nd term. (If I were a praying woman, I'd be on me knees nightly asking for these natural causes to occur). If just one of them goes, we get a SCOTUS majority, 5-4. If both of them go, we hit the jackpot, a 6 liberals to 3 conservatives bench. Justice Ginsburg is 79. I suspect she may retire soon, paving the way for Obama to appoint her replacement. Justice Breyer is 73, and may wish to retire by the end of Obama's second term.
Theoretically, we could have a 6-3 bench at the end of Obama's 2nd term. As a bonus, 5 of these liberal justices could be under 60 yrs old when Obama's 2nd term ends if he wisely appoints younger talent. And Justice Sotomayor would be 61. This would give us a SCOTUS majority for many years, barring tragedy.
The point is, the importance of obtaining a liberal majority in the SCOTUS sometime during Obama's 2nd term, with regard to our situation, cannot be overstated.
With a SCOTUS majority and a Democratic President, the odds of our winning the rights lottery during Obama's 2nd term are extremely good. Another Dem President and a SCOTUS majority in 2016 puts a lock on our rights forever.
So, these scenarios are one way we can overcome the states rights problem we now face. But we must re-elect Obama, despite the misgivings many of us have had, and then hope that nature acts in our interests with regard to SCOTUS.
So the moral of this tale is, if Obama is not re-elected, we are totally fucked. If he is re-elected, we could be impervious to legalized bigotry forever.
End of story.
Meh.
MuseRider
(34,057 posts)Duncan Grant
(8,257 posts)It's tremendous. The President of the United States "came out" in support of equal marriage. Today, the world is forever changed.
I'm soaking in it.
mitchtv
(17,718 posts)and I am a real political cynic. Gay tm is now open again
Duncan Grant
(8,257 posts)(Just between you and me, I don't understand the wailing and gnashing of teeth. The guy did this before the November elections - fer cryin' out loud.)
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Obama, 2012:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/09/politics/obama-same-sex-marriage/index.html?hpt=hp_c1
"'At a certain point I've just concluded that for me, personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married,' Obama said in an interview with ABC News...The president said he supports the concept of states deciding the issue on their own, ABC News reported."
Cheney, 2009:
Cheney supports same-sex marriage 'on a state-by-state basis'
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/02/nation/na-cheney2.
"June 2, 2009 WASHINGTON Former Vice President Dick Cheney waded into another roiling public debate Monday, saying he supports same-sex marriage as long as the issue is decided by states rather than the federal government."
There is more evolving to do.
Duncan Grant
(8,257 posts)It's still a big f*cking deal (to borrow a phrase from another vice-president).
Cheney had nothing to lose. He wasn't in a reelection campaign, was he?
Cheney or no Cheney: Today was unprecedented in American history. Absolutely unprecedented.
There will always be more evolving to do. Days like today are rare.
LostinRed
(840 posts)I think it is just great what the President said. He has been the best President on gay rights in history and the fact that he finally said he believes that same sex couples deserve the right to be married is a huge step. I donated $100 dollars to his campaign tonight as a thank you.
pinto
(106,886 posts)What happens next is legislative, but the very fact that the President came forward and made this statement is a game changer. A good day for us all...