PrideSource: Obama tells CBN he "grapples with" abortion & gay issues

[Bluebear]

OBAMA SNUBS? Meanwhile, the Obama campaign has not responded to requests from this reporter and several large gay newspapers around the country for a sit-down interview on a wide range of LGBT-related topics. Campaign spokesperson Ben LaBolt pointed to The Advocate interview as evidence that the campaign is responsive to such requests, but he stopped short of saying whether a more comprehensive Q-and-A might be scheduled with any gay news publication in the future. Last week, the campaign did reach out to the National Gay Newspaper Guild, a coalition of the 12 largest gay newspapers in the country. It sent the papers an essay it said the senator wrote "addressing many of the issues that have come up over the past several weeks." In it, Obama reiterates his position on a number of issues -that he would repeal the entire federal Defense of Marriage Act (Clinton would repeal only part), repeal the military's "don't ask/don't tell policy," and "use the bully pulpit to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws." But he also reiterated that he believes "full equality" can be achieved without marriage licenses. And, while he says his administration would support a "fully inclusive" Employment Non-Discrimination Act, he does not specify how he would vote if a sexual orientation-only version comes before him in the Senate next year.

OBAMA BOLDNESS: In his essay, Senator Obama also asserts, "We will not secure full equality for all LGBT Americans until we learn how to address that deep disagreement and move beyond it. To achieve that goal, we must state our beliefs boldly," he wrote, "bring the message of equality to audiences that have not yet accepted it, and listen to what those audiences have to say in return." Obama spoke to one of those audiences that have not yet accepted it. Obama granted a sit-down Q & A November 11 with David Brody of CBN News, an affiliate of television evangelical Pat Robertson. Brody asked him about his positions on abortion and gay marriage. Obama called the issues "profoundly difficult" and said they are "ones I grapple with." On gay marriage, he said "My belief is that, as a public official, my role is to make sure that everybody is treated fairly, and everybody has equal rights. And I know that, sometimes in this debate, there's talk about, 'Well, we don't mind giving gays and lesbians equal rights, but not special rights.' Well, the fact is, right now, many gay couples, for example, can't visit each other in the hospital. And, when I sit down and read scripture, and I think, 'How would Jesus feel about somebody not being able to visit somebody they love when they're sick,' I conclude that that is something that is important. And certainly as a public official, it's important for me to make sure that those basic rights, that basic equality is available." To gauge the boldness of the delivery, go to www.cbn.com/CBNnews/266144.aspx.

http://www.pridesource.com/article.shtml?article=28086

[Mythsaje]

1. What, precisely, are "special rights?"

The only ones I know of getting "special rights" are RW Christians who can expect politicians and leaders to give THEIR worldview precedence over others when it comes to questions such as this one. THEY want their commandments put up on public buildings. They want THEIR opinions about abortion to trump those of others, they want THEIR religious beliefs to be taught beside science in the classrooms.

Sounds an awful lot like "special rights" to me.

[Basileus Basileon]

7. That's what Obama's kind of getting at. Not the part about RWers, but rather

the part about "what are special rights, anyway?" He's not endorsing the concept. He's saying that while some people call it "special rights," he's looking at couples that can't visit each other when they're sick, and believes that is a basic right that he needs to ensure.

And I know that, sometimes in this debate, there's talk about, 'Well, we don't mind giving gays and lesbians equal rights, but not special rights.' Well, the fact is, right now, many gay couples, for example, can't visit each other in the hospital. And, when I sit down and read scripture, and I think, 'How would Jesus feel about somebody not being able to visit somebody they love when they're sick,' I conclude that that is something that is important. And certainly as a public official, it's important for me to make sure that those basic rights, that basic equality is available."

[Mythsaje]

11. I'd have been a lot more comfortable

if he'd have just came out and said "there are no such thing as "special rights. Or, if there are, it isn't the gays who are asking for them."

[MethuenProgressive]

16. Dear Barack: Gay rights are human rights. Women's rights are human rights. Please act like a human.

Thank you for reading,

[Drunken Irishman]

2. Hm, headline made me think something completely different from the article.

I thought Obama would grapple with it in a negative way, instead, it looks like he's using the teachings of Christ to endorse the idea of acceptance and equality for gay and lesbian couples. Of course, maybe I read that wrong, so who knows.

[Bluebear]

3. Why are they "profoundly difficult issues" then?

[NMMNG]

4. Oh, you know

He doesn't want to cheese off the homophobes too much and lose all those votes by simply saying outright that GLBT people deserve equal rights and bigotry is wrong. :eyes:

[Drunken Irishman]

5. Because they are?

What makes an issue difficult might not be built in what you believe, but rather what other people may believe.

But for many Americans, politicians included, these issues are difficult to understand and accept. Does that make them bad people? No, especially when they open themselves up to the ability to change. My grandma was a very liberal person, but wasn't always open to the idea of accepting homosexuality. It wasn't until later in her life and grappling with the issue that she became more accepting of that lifestyle.

In a perfect world, everyone would agree these issues do not need to be difficult, as they are equality issues. However, life is not perfect and many people today, though open to the idea, still have difficulty understanding it. I don't think that makes them a bad person or an incompetent leader. Especially when, in the next sentence, they discuss how we should provide equality for all and not discriminate based on sexuality.

[Bluebear]

8. Then I call for Obama to meet with gay papers, not just the 700 Club and CBN.

As to him believing we should provide equality, you do not do that by hiring anti-gay entertainers as your emcee at campaign events. I would think.

[Drunken Irishman]

9. He should meet with gay papers.

I think it's stupid for him not to. However, I do not believe Obama is a homophobe and anti-gay. He fucked up by allowing the McWhat's His Face to emcee that event and he should admit that, but I still do not believe he is anti-gay or would be a roadblock to gay progress if he were president.

[Kucinich4America]

6. Because a lot of people honestly believe that homosexuality is a "sin".

They believe the Bible says so, and they don't question it. Some even literally believe that God nuked all of Sodom and Gomorrah county because a couple of gay guys wanted to get it on with some visiting angels.

I'm not justifying those beliefs, and I don't believe Obama is either. But you have to acknowledge that they exist in order to know when and where to attempt a reasonable discussion with such people. And obviously, I'm not referring to the Fred Phelps types who actually hate any non-heterosexual person, as they're beyond reasonable discussion.

John Kerry lost several states in 2004 because of anti-gay marriage ballot measures. That shouldn't happen in the 21st century but it did. The only way to ensure it doesn't happen again is to remove the ability of the Rove/Atwater types to use it as a wedge issue. And you can't do that without talking to the people who would otherwise be taken in by that bullshit.

Unless you kidnap them all on election day and keep them from voting. Which might actually be easier.

[cboy4]

10. Listen, the people who believe homosexuality is a "sin"

are religious nuts.

They are hopeless, and will not change their minds based on what a politician says.

Obama needs to attend pandering anonymous meetings, stat.

And don't forget how the historic and dramatic NJ gay marriage decision right before the November 06 election cost Democrats congress, including the state of New Jersey.

Oh that's right, it didn't happen.

DUers and pundits were peeing their pants with all the doomsday talk about how the gays were going to cost another election.

Taking a stand, especially when it comes to civil liberties, is strong and noble.

Hiding under the sheets, afraid of wedge issues is embarrassing and weak.

[glowing]

12. When is someone going call b.s. on this whole issue...

Look people are entitled by the law to be treated equally.. And that includes marriage... In fact, I object to the whole marriage licensing thing in the first place... Where do they get off implying that I have to ask permission to marry anyone.... What we need to do is write: I intend to marry _______, and live fully as a married person does with all the rights that this entails... signed, me. Then the state and federal govt has no other acting jurisdiction over this decree... I don't know why more people aren't doing this in the first place. AND if you divorce you sign another decree declaring yourselves to be dissolved of marriage to one another.

It is ridiculous to ask permission from our govt to marry, and even more ridiculous, if we divorce, to beg for dissolvement, pay the fees and wait a year while we "seperate".

Anyway, its just a hot button issue that draws the R.W. croud out at election time, befuddles the politicians into making a stand, and pisses of the gay community. Its just like abortion. It has been declared to be a privacy issue. It is no one else's business but the woman's and her Dr. in helping her to achieve her requests regarding her health. End of debate. If its wrong for you and your body, then don't do it. I wouldn't do it.. I desperately want a child... but for some they don't want a child, can't afford a child, or whatever.. its none of my business... Just like its none of their business who I marry as long as it isn't a minor or a goat.

Please people, don't ask for permission to marry. I didn't realize the implications before I got mine, otherwise, I would have done it this way myself. They don't own us. If you ask for permission, you may be denied.. If you tell them you are doing something, they have no other recourse, except to file your intention in the folder. It is only in the states that have made special attention of what can and cannot constitute a married couple that there is a problem.. Obviously, someone on the other side knew the loop hole. Otherwise, the state cannot deny something you are not asking permission for... Now, in order to get your benefits of marriage, you will have to go thru the courts system.. and really, they cannot allow a company to deny something that the state recognizes... Win-win... wish someone would damn try it, instead of saying the state won't let us marry.

[Didereaux]

13. Rev.Barak Obama, President of the USA ... I don't think so

[aquart]

14. "Grapples."

I can imagine the meeting that picked out that word.

[MalloyLiberal]

15. Copying Edwards yet again