Reply #118: NCevilDUer, I'm your friend here, so try to hear me out.

[kdpeters]

And hand me that shovel before you dig any deeper. :P

First of all, as a 100%, inspired, enthusiastic, excited, and committed Barack Obama supporter, I think I understand and share some of your frustrations with the unfair shake he's received from many people in this forum on these issues. We're of the same mind in our reaction "he opposes equality for gays", in our frustrations with the double standards he's held to, and in wanting to slap people for their lack of perspective in this election. I get that part and I think you're right.

On the other hand, it's clear that you are sympathetic to GLBT concerns, but you're not at all well informed or well thought out about them. That's OK. You're intent is in the right place I think, but your delivery needs scrapping. The problem is that your defense of Obama comes across patronizing and flippant rendering moot any valid point you started off with in his defense. As a fellow Obama guy deeply invested in winning the White House, I have an interest in seeing that you can put up a reasonable defense without insulting everyone and talking down to us. It looks bad on Obama and on the rest of us supporters.

Try to pay attention to when you go from defending Obama against an unfair criticism and cross over into justifying or rationalizing his position by turning your criticism onto the victim and trying to delegitimize her concerns.

Try to separate the two arguments because you have a good point when you point out that we have never yet had a presidential nominee support marriage equality, that it is no surprise or disappointment, or that to call that out as an example of homophobia is over the top and unjustified. When you find yourself starting to lecture gayfolks about what's best for us, what we need to sacrifice for the election or act as an authority out of ignorance -- "marriage" is NOT simply a word, my friend -- try to stop yourself once you've made your point about unfair homophobia charges and then let's talk about civil union/marriage issue separately.

The thing is, the President is not going to play a role at all in leading or legislating marriage equality. So what if Obama supports civil unions, but not marriage. It's irrelevant. Look at California. The issue is going to be pushed up from the states either through the courts or the legislature, but either way, the President's desk will be one of the last places the issue is decided if it ever gets there at all. I'm confident that even though Obama says he supports civil unions and not marriage, he won't put up roadblocks to the steady progression of marriage equality across the country. If marriage equality comes through the courts, he will enforce it. If a marriage equality bill lands on his desk from Congress, he will sign it into law. But for right now, I don't really care about his opinion on the campaign trail, because he's not going to play a part for a long time. There's no point in any of us hand-wringing over it, and there's certainly no reason for you to insult us with "costing us the election" bullshit. We will continue to fight for equality in the states and it won't cost Obama the election. It's a pointless conflict with feelings hurt unnecessarily.

I hope that comes across in the spirit it was meant. Like I said, I'm your friend here, so I hope you'll give me the benefit of the doubt if I come across other than gracious.

Karl