Obama calls anti-gay ballot measures in Maine and Washington "divisive and discriminatory"

[FreeState]

Thank you Mr. President! Now lets get a commercial made of that and on the air ASAP!

http://gay.americablog.com/2009/10/obama-calls-anti-gay-ballot-measures-in.html

Obama calls anti-gay ballot measures in Maine and Washington "divisive and discriminatory"
Posted by Joe Sudbay (DC) at 3:35 PM

The White House said today that President Obama is opposed to the anti-gay referenda in Maine and Washington state, calling them "divisive and discriminatory measures." Kerry Eleveld of the Advocate reports:

In response to an inquiry from The Advocate, the White House issued the following statement regarding President Barack Obama’s position on anti-gay voter referenda in Maine and Washington.

“The President has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples, and as he said at the Human Rights Campaign dinner, he believes ‘strongly in stopping laws designed to take rights away.’ Also at the dinner, he said he supports, ‘ensuring that committed gay couples have the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country.’"

That's a strong statement from our President about the discrimination and divisiveness being pushed by anti-gay forces in Maine and Washington state. It should help a lot. Kudos to the White House on this one.

[pinto]

1. Here's the cited Advocate piece from their Washington correspondent -

White House Says No to Antigay Referenda

By Kerry Eleveld
ADVOCATE.COM

In response to an inquiry from The Advocate, the White House issued the following statement regarding President Barack Obama’s position on same-sex relationship recognition voter referenda in Maine and Washington.

“The President has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples, and as he said at the Human Rights Campaign dinner, he believes ‘strongly in stopping laws designed to take rights away.’ Also at the dinner, he said he supports, ‘ensuring that committed gay couples have the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country.’"

Maine’s Question 1 asks voters whether to overturn a law that legalized same-sex marriage earlier this year; Washington's Referendum 71 asks voters to affirm or repeal a law passed earlier this year that expands domestic-partnership rights for same-sex couples and some senior couples. Voters in both states will weigh in on the measures November 3.

The White House statement could help LGBT activists fighting to defeat Maine's antigay measure, as Obama's approval ratings continue to flourish there -- a new poll this month found that 58% of Maine voters approve of the president's job performance. A late September poll put his approval ratings in Washington slightly lower, at 53%.

President Obama supports civil unions over full marriage equality for same-sex couples, but he has increasingly walked a fine line on the issue now that six states have legalized same-sex marriage. The president has also said that he believes states should have the right to determine the question of marriage, and as such he supports full repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits the federal government from recognizing legal same-sex marriages. His administration, however, continues to defend the law in the courts.

Eleveld is The Advocate's Washington correspondent.

http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2009/10/16/White_House_Issues_Statement_on_Maine_Washington/

[FreeState]

2. Thanks! :) n/t

[Toasterlad]

3. I Appreciate the President Saying This.

It's still hypocritical of him considering his own position on same-sex marriage, but at least he's on the right side of this issue. I appreciate him speaking out.

[mitchtv]

9. Don't worry, the other side has a quote or two

that they will be using...again

[Toasterlad]

10. Very True. Which Is Why I Usually Wish He'd Just Shut Up About Gay Issues.

[Unvanguard]

4. That statement is many things, but "strong" is not one of them. n/t

[t0dd]

5. Wow, he didn't say he "continues to prefer civil unions" at the end of the message

how strong indeed! :sarcasm:

[HowHasItComeToThis]

6. DESIGNED TO PULL THE FASCISTS TO THE POLLS

NEVER TRUST THE CHURCHERS

[johnnypneumatic]

7. it carefully doesn't mention Maine or Washington or marriage

The statement is from someone at "the White House", it's not a specific quote from President Obama. And was only given when specifically asked by the Advocate.

How about white house reporters ask Gibbs and see if he ever heard about it
Gibbs: "I haven't discussed that with him. Let me check and get back to you"

It carefully doesn't mention Maine or Washington or marriage, just as President Obama carefully didn't mention them at his HRC speech.

I always get the feeling he is holding me at arms length as if I smell bad.

If President Obama really wants change and justice for gay people, he could be more public about it.

Such as in this case a direct video and audio quote of him saying:
"I oppose these divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples in Maine and Washington. The human rights of minority people should not be up to a vote. Equal rights are guaranteed by the Constitution"
A direct and unequivocal video that can be used in television commercials to blast the bigots.

He could also have made his speech at last sunday's march to hundreds of thousands (and that might have even been televised on some alleged news shows), rather than to a select few at the HRC dinner.

He could also address the issue head on with one of his wednesday night televised speeches to the whole country, like he did for the health reform issue.

So far, he gives his pro-gay talks safely limited to small audiences of gays, he needs to give a speech directly to all the american people, or at least to all of congress and tell them "Let's get this done now"

[Duncan Grant]

8. DOMA: "His administration, however, continues to defend the law in the courts."

We can't 'cheerleader' our way around that dead horse, now can we?