The top issue in the USA today is NOT gay marriage

[Jersey Devil]

I support gay marriage. As a lawyer, I think banning it is a denial of equal protection under the 14th Amendment and as a person I think it is just plain unfair and nonsensical. It's a shame and terribly unfair.

I also think it is tragic that millions have no health insurance or access to good health care, that many children have to attend inadequate schools, that our soldiers are sent to die for lies, that the poor are being made the scapegoats for the greed of Wall Street, that homeless people exist in the richest country in the world and on and on and on.

There are so many important issues that have to be addressed that I just don't think disappointment over one of them should be cause to take down the only person who has shown real promise in dealing with the rest.

I also don't think that the choice of Warren for the inaugural is necessarily indicative at all of what Obama will or won't do for gay and lesbian rights during his administration any more than his choice of a poet would be indicative of his position on whatever issues the poet may address at the inaugural.

Perhaps that makes me a cold hearted pragmatist and if it does I am willing to live with it.

[firedupdem]

1. economy

I have been slammed by this economy and had to relocate because of it. My heart aches for my friends in Michigan and elsewhere in jeopardy of losing their jobs and health care too. We have a lot of issues that need to be worked on.

I'm excited for the New President and looking forward to the agenda being implemented.

[NYC_SKP]

2. K and R.....nothing to add.

:patriot:

[mondo joe]

3. Strawman. It doesn't have to be the top issue to be decent and fair to GLBT people.

Thanks, Mr Strawman.

[iamjoy]

39. The Argument Is Valid

Nah, saying the top issue in the USA is not "gay rights" is a valid argument - it's just backwards.

Rather than directing it at GLBT folks - who only want the same rights those of us who happen to be heterosexual automatically get - but on those who would deny them those rights. If some so called religious types weren't so obsessed with what the word "marriage" supposedly means or has always meant could they turn their focus to improving our schools, etc.

Anyway, some of these GLBT issues are related to the problems of the day.

Let's take health insurance and the problem of Americans without it. If same sex couples could marry, or be joined in a civil union*, they would be entitled to the same rights as any heterosexual couple. Would that help reduce the ranks of the uninsured?

What about the state of our children? If homosexuals could adopt, would that provide permanent loving homes for children now in foster care (or worse)**?

If homosexuals didn't have to fight for the same rights automatically granted to straight Americans - rights which are often intrinsic and taken for granted by those who have them - could we devote our time to these other issues?

Why isn't the fact that we are denying basic rights to American citizens a top issue in this country?

* in this case, civil union means all the same secular rights as marriage, but without any religious implication
** This is not to say there aren't loving foster parents who take good care of children for years at a time.

[mondo joe]

45. Still a strawman. Who here has been saying it's the top priority in the US today?

Anyone?

[bertman]

62. Maybe not saying it, but definitely acting like it.

[mondo joe]

67. So it's a BS accusation. Good for you to admit it. Now can you tell me, which top

priority is advanced by selecting a lying bigot for an honor at the inauguration that couldn't have been served by someone less offensive?

[girl gone mad]

79. You make a good point.

Maybe Obama should have selected an economist to give a speech at the inauguration rather than a bigoted preacher.

[PerpetuallyDazed]

90. Let's be honest: to the Religious-Right it is!

We've seen it the last fifty years--Republican domination of "moral values" over the other ones that "liberals" profess. Health insurance, Iraq/War, poverty, global warming, ect, are seen as "liberal causes."

[cwydro]

4. K and R.

Good luck!

[crappyjazz]

5. I doubt we'll be able to "take him down"

and I care not

I've put my concerns on the back burner for too long and I won't do it any more

[lamp_shade]

6. Economy and Health Care.

[Starry Messenger]

7. .

No one is trying to take down Obama. But this choice of Warren is a lightning rod. 18,000 families are about to have their rights dissolved in California because of a law Warren helped pass. This sounds a sour note on what should be a joyous day for all.

[cali]

14. Actually, there absolutely are people here who are trying to "take down Obama"

and no, I can't name them as that's verboten.

[Starry Messenger]

21. I know this for a fact as well.

One of my hobbies is taking screen shots of their BS here and on other websites and sending them to the admins. However, I tend to think that in this instance it serves me better to assume good faith on the parts of the people who are angry about this.

1) It might get things to a more civil state faster.

2) I don't think Obama is under serious threat from the unnamed verboten ones. They are pathetic.

[Ken Burch]

33. You can be sure that I'm not one of them.

And you can also be sure that nobody who's raised the Warren issue was just a bitter-end "PUMA".

[Mike 03]

34. Not me. Even though I am empathizing with the GLBT community,

I LOVE Obama and I trust that he is going to be an amazing President.

[HamdenRice]

83. I've seen the anti-Democrat sites also. I don't understand why they don't have granite cookies

There are definitely DUers who have set up websites to oppose the Democratic Party. Yet them remain on DU. Go figure.

[JVS]

85. Which is why I think it is important to criticize Obama's decision in ways that unite rather than...

divide the left and the party.

[Marrah_G]

8. Of all the people he could have chosen, why this one?

That is my issue.

The GBLT community worked so hard to help get him elected.

He could have picked anyone.

But he chose someone who is actively working to deny and repeal the rights of the GBLT community.

Not just someone who has different beliefs, but someone who is actively working to keep the GBLT community from being equal in the eyes of the law. That is the big difference.

I am hoping he does a better job with other issues, but as far as equal rights go, I doubt he will do anything to protect or advanced the idea that all people deserve equality.

It makes me sad that he chose this path. I think less of him now.

I don't regret my vote for a moment, McCain would have been far worse, but I will never look at him the same way again.

Nor will I watch the inauguration that I had previously been looking forward to.

[WillParkinson]

9. Oh golly gee...

Thanks for letting us know it's not the top on your list. But, honestly, not everyone has the same list. It may not be important to you but it IS important to me. I will die someday. I want Paul to benefit from my hard work. I want him to be taken care of.

Yeah, sorry if my life isn't at the top of your list. All that matters to me is it's at the top of mine.

[mondo joe]

11. Because, of course, if it's not the top priority, anything goes.

The strawmen are out in full force today.

[WillParkinson]

13. It's easy for things to not be at the top of the list for people...

When they won't have to worry about it because they have or can get theirs.

[mondo joe]

19. It's a fallacious notion that something has to be at the TOP of the list to be decent about it.

In all honesty, paper recycling isn't at the top of my list. But I use my recycle bin appropriately. It's not hard.

[jonnyblitz]

47. the OP is saying 'Shut the fuck up, fags, it's not important"

i bet they wish they could say what they really want to say.

[bertman]

64. That's pure bullshit, jonnblitz. The OP does not say that and does not even imply that.

You are blinded by your anger.

[lumberjack_jeff]

88. How presumptuous. n/t

[iamjoy]

50. No Kidding!

I am tempted to agree with the original post, and then I wonder how I would feel if it were my rights being denied.

Maybe I'm not really in a position to say, eh?

[Neecy]

10. we didn't start this, you know

And I feel equally passionate about those issues.

I also feel passionate about not being shit on when convenient by a Democratic politician. I feel passionate about being compared to a pedophile. I feel passionate about my own rights.

No one is trying to take him down. He picked this fight - not us.

[mondo joe]

12. Jersey Devil, can you point out the posts that say same sex marriage is the top issue in the US?

Because it seems you're just making shit up.

[chascarrillo]

15. The top issue in the USA in 1808 was NOT slavery.

So, all you abolitionists should just shut up and accept the enslavement of blacks, at least for the time being. (Needless to say, if you ARE black, you don't have a say in the matter. Also, it's 1808, so women, please get back in the kitchen and let the men handle this.)

Perhaps that makes me a cold hearted pragmatist and if it does I am willing to live with it.

[yourguide]

27. How do you know?

Were you there?

In fact I would guess it was. On January 1, 1808, the importation of slaves into the United States was made illegal. The law of 1808 originated in the competing interests among American colonialists and European merchants and royalty, all of whom had been profiting from the slave trade for centuries...and I will bet you it was much discussed in 1808.

[Upfront]

16. Yep

Me to.

[Solon]

17. Strawman #423, or is it #426, I forget which.

Wow, your post is so deep, for a second, it actually seemed like I was in the kiddy pool at the park.

[percussivemadness]

18. whilst I agree to a point, the issue of Gay marriage reflects on the society as a whole

as such, it is inexorably intertwined...

[DCBob]

20. I suspect the foremost gay rights advocates will suddenly change their focus...

when they lose their jobs and are standing in a soup line.

[mondo joe]

26. Gee, would I rather stand in a soup line or have my kids taken from me for being gay?

Pretty dumb of you, I'd say.

[DCBob]

28. Who's kids are being taken away??

I was mostly referring to gay marriage. Even though it is an important issue I suspect it will become a lower priority to survival.

[mondo joe]

29. Gay people. You don't know what happens when some gay couples split up.

And you seem to also not know some gay people can't get into the hospital to be with their dying partner.

What do you think would be worse: Standing in a bread line or being kept from your dying spouse?

[DCBob]

30. Well that would be a bad situation either way.

I am not trying to minimize the gay rights struggle but clearly there are major issues this country and the world must deal with and we all must give a bit or we are all doomed.

[mondo joe]

35. Didn't answer though, did you? I can tell you, I'd take a soup line over those possibilities

without a moment's hesitation.

[DCBob]

42. At some point there may not even be a soup line.

Hopefully it does not get to that point but it could.

[mondo joe]

43. And yet you STILL haven't answered my simple questions.

I don't wonder why.

[Binka]

60. Hey Huggy Bear

You seem to understand this poster. I have a kink in my neck and his type just make it twitch.

[mondo joe]

61. When people evade simple questions regarding their position, I tend to conclude they

know they are indefensible.

[mondo joe]

58. When people can't answer simple questions about their case, I think it often means

they know they've been exposed.

[Solon]

36. Since when has this become a zero sum game?

Focusing on civil rights doesn't mean you have to remove focus from other issues that also affect people. The Government itself deals with dozens of crises at once, and individuals do so as well, at the individual level. Even the President can focus on more than one thing at once.

[DCBob]

38. It's about priorities during a crisis.

We are in a major f'king crisis. If we don't solve it, nothing else matters.

[mondo joe]

40. What do those priorities have to do with who you honor at the inauguration exactly?

What of those priorities requires honoring a lying bigot?

[DCBob]

52. The worst effects of the economic crisis will probably not be felt until after the inauguration.

I suspect the massive layoffs will begin in the spring. Hopefully I am wrong but it does not look very promising at the moment.

[mondo joe]

55. Which priority is served by having a lying bigot honored at the inauguration?

Oh I forgot - you don't answer questions.

[Solon]

44. And guess what? Crises, even multple ones, can be handled effectively...

and at the same time you can also focus on civil rights if you so choose. Its not like this is the first time we've had an economic crisis, war, and a civil rights crisis, all at once. Oddly enough, the country was able to pull through then, and it will be able to pull through now.

[mondo joe]

48. Obama is the one, after all, who said a President has to multitask. NT

[Solon]

51. That's true, its not like he's a computer that can only do sequential processing.

Processing one thing at a time, and solving them in some predetermined order. Human beings multitask on all sorts of issues and crises on a daily basis, I don't see how this is any different.

[mondo joe]

53. I'd settle for just knowing: which national priority requires having a lying bigot deliver the

invocation.

Is it going to help the economy? Trade? Global warming?

[bluedawg12]

80. I want to know why the "priority wailers" don't post about their priorities?

Nothing is forcing them to write another entirely new thread about Warren. :crazy:

[NWHarkness]

46. You weren't trying to minimize?????

I can't imagine how you could have done so more.

[mondo joe]

49. Hey, who cares if your family is ripped apart by law, as long as you have a full pantry.

I;m always surprised at the thoughtlessness and shallowness of people.

[QC]

54. Sorry your kid got hauled off. Here, have a can of tuna. n/t

[mondo joe]

57. You.

Crack. Me. Up.

[eyesroll]

41. Um, in Arkansas they are.

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Arkansas_Unmarried_Couple_Adoption_Ban_(2008)

Let's say you've been a foster parent for the last few years and you want to adopt your foster kids. And you've made a life commitment to a partner. Maybe you've been living together for the last few years, but this was OK up until November 4.

Under this law, you'd have to choose between your partner or your kids. You are cohabitating outside of marriage, and the laws of that state won't let you get married. If your partner moves out, maybe you'll be able to keep your kids (but even that would be sketchy--somewhere, a neighbor is waiting to be a character witness against you).

I would also suspect that some adoptions-in-progress now are stopped because of this new law. Maybe a same-sex couple brought a child home from another country, but Arkansas won't formalize the adoption? Then what happens to the kids?

[Warren Stupidity]

22. what is wrong with just agreeing that this was an awful mistake?

I guess that is the part of this now turgid debate here that I don't get. Stop posting excuses. Stop posting why you think this is not important. What Obama did was wrong. People, a whole class of people, have been hurt by an act that legitimizes denial of their basic rights at a time when those rights are under severe attack. Show some solidarity and stand with those of us who support equality for all.

[QC]

25. Thank you for saying it so well!

:thumbsup:

The smug, airy dismissal of people's genuine concerns hurts a lot more than the Warren business itself does. Is it really so hard to acknowledge that this was not a very smooth move?

Thank you!

[ThomCat]

23. Your priorities are not mine. Civil rights IS one of my top priorities.

x(

Maybe you're happily privileged in your white, heterosexual, male, non-disabled life and civil rights issues just don't affect you at all. Fine. Step aside and don't get in our way. We'll keep moving forward without you.

[Bjorn Against]

24. Are you being denied your civil rights?

If not it seems extremely insensitive to tell people who are being denied civil rights that their freedom is not all that high up on your agenda.

I have many issues at the top of my agenda, civil rights is not the only issue that is important to me but it certainly one of the issues that is extremely important and I am not going to shut up about it. If you truly cared about civil rights you would not be undermining the importance of this issue.

[Mike 03]

31. Can you put yourself in their shoes for a moment?

I agree entirely that there are issues that, personally, for me, are "front burner" issues, such as the wars and health care.

But do you think the Blacks in the fifties had trouble making their case, to the rest of America, that their claims to equality were important? I'm sure people like us said the same thing: "Yeah, yeah, that's important and all, but we'll get to it after we deal with (fill in whatever the big issues of the day were).

If you are an oppressed minority, nobody is going to rescue you out of the blue. You are going to have to make your grievances known, even if it's "inconvenient" for people who would rather not hear about it now.

I'm in no position to say that the issues troubling the GLBT community are "less important" to them than other issues, anymore than--had I been alive in the sixties--I could have said blacks should not worry about where they have to sit to eat or which fountain they can drink from or where they can on the bus.

This is not that hard a concept to grasp, I don't think.

[Ken Burch]

32. Nice strawman. But you know perfectly well

That those who've raised the gay marriage issue are not dismissive of the other issues.

And let me ask you this:

If, four years from now, all the things you mention have been achieved, but gays are STILL out in the cold, will you STILL argue that they should support this administration for reelection?

Finally, would you have been one of the ones in the early 60's saying "shut up. JFK will get to everything in his second term"?

[Tangerine LaBamba]

37. Were you trying to be offensive,

or are you just that insensitive and self-absorbed?

As an attorney, I am embarrassed that you and I share the same profession. You do seem to prioritize without actually prioritizing - you just put gays in their place, which is not, as you make abundantly clear, a terribly significant place.

As Obama once famously said, "A President has to be able to do more than one thing at a time." I would think that you might be capable of entertaining several important issues at the same time inside your head without going out of your way to demean an entire group of disenfranchised Americans.

That said, it's nice your ignorance didn't prohibit you from advertising it publicly. People like you do need to stand out, and you surely do.

[HEyHEY]

56. And this isn't Obama saying "I'll get to that, just wait" about gay rights

This is him saying "Fuck you"

[Tangerine LaBamba]

59. I agree, but.........

And this is a great big, fat, hopeful "but" - I'm going to hold on and keep the faith and try to figure that Obama has some sort of subtext to this horrendous choice. That there's a politically expedient reason for it besides the obvious one of sucking ass of the rightwingnut fundies. He's a smart politician, and he doesn't do anything without it having at least a couple of rationales behind it, so I'm going to continue to be hopeful.

Right now, I'm reading a wonderful book by the wonderful, late Studs Terkel, and it's called "Hope Dies Last." That's where I'm staying for now.

At the same time, I ain't taking any shit from dummies. No one should.

[terrya]

63. These "homos and dykes and their trivial concerns" posts are getting tedious.

Gay men and lesbians are perfectly aware, worried, and are working to deal with the serious problems facing this country today. It's insulting to say that all we give a damn about in this country is our equality. And I'm sick and tired of that implication around here.

[bertman]

65. Recommend. And agree with the OP.

[mondo joe]

66. You agree? Good. Who here has said gay marriage is the top priority in the US?

[Phx_Dem]

68. I agree, and I'm willing to live with it as well.

[EFerrari]

69. No, that doesn't make you a pragmatist.

[davsand]

70. The average American is not on the same wavelength as the average DUer.

Franky, I think you are correct that a lot of America is not upset with Obama at this point. I also think you are correct that opinion polls would probably show that most folks are terribly worried about the same issues as they were during the election--except maybe the economy is polling a little stronger on the "panic meter" these days.

I also think that DU by its very design is geared to and populated by people who DO look a lot harder at ALL the issues not just the ones immediately affecting them personally. Human Rights are a fundamental to many (if not all) of us and I understand fully why there is a lot of discussion on here lately about GLBT rights.

Something I DO think is a bit odd, however, is the number of people who have been (become?) so VERY negative to Obama in such a short time. I dunno about you all, but I don't agree with anyone 100% of the time (not even my partner.) I find it mind boggling to think that anyone expects to agree with a national figure 100% of the time. It defies logic.

You can say you disagree with him, you can write him letters or talk about it as much as you want to, but the bottom line is that he has NOT even taken office yet. You may want to delay the discussions of his Primary challenger until he's at least slept one night as the President--ya know?

YMMV, and peace to you all.


Laura

edit for typo

[GeorgeGist]

71. No it's not ...

and Obama's poor choice for an opening act reflects non-sanity.

[NMMNG]

72. Yeah

Equal rights are at the bottom of the list, as usual. Get back under the bus you whiney homos. There are far more pressing concerns right now. Perhaps once we've solved every problem known to humanity and figured out how to make the Cubbies finally win one, we can get to your paltry concerns.

But don't forget to vote Dem.



:puke:

[Bluebear]

73. Don't forget to mail in your check first.

[NMMNG]

74. Of course.

Then again, thanks to the bigoted-assed laws in this country I pay more taxes and therefore have less to give than those in federally recognized marriages. In fact my state-recognized marriage is currently in danger of being forcibly-nullified by that hateful Proposition 8, which will make me even worse off. Maybe they should rethink that marriage equality thing, eh?

[Bluebear]

76. Don't worry. Rick Warren is only singing one song.

Oh no, wrong headliner.

About your marriage, yeah, well too bad, but as I was informed here today, we are an impatient bunch and everything takes time.

[NMMNG]

77. Might as well be the same headliner

One song then, one prayer now, and who knows what one thing will be next? He's got a good trend going on here after all....



Meanwhile we should just get back under the bus like good little homos and wait maybe another century until certain people consider themselves ready to bestow rights upon us.

[Jennicut]

86. I sympathize with you however I don't think the poster means you are whiney

I do think Obama has real promise to change some things unfortunately he is not progressive enough on gay rights. The decision is whether to support him and put pressure on him to change or not support him at all and look to another leader on gay rights.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

75. Do you even realize that gay rights have to do with those "more important" issues?

Like discrimination against gays both in the military and concerning health insurance?

Stop trying to make this seem like a selfish move on the part of GLBT people. These are basic civil rights we're talking about, and they're not meant to be shoved aside for an arbitrary totem pole of Major Issues that we should bow down to.

[bluedawg12]

78. "Taking down" Obama is not the gay political agenda.

If that's what you meant, then, that is an overstatement.

Many are, however, angered and disappointed in his symbolic selection of Warren, the reasons for the disappointment have already been amply covered in many threads.

That selection may or may not be a predictor of his future policies, but concern that it might be a predictor, is not unreasonable.

In the meantime, the selection is important symbolically or PE Obama wouldn't have chosen Warren. The symbolism of that selection is troubling in light of Warren’s statements about gays.

In regards to dealing with the big issues, the economy, health care, job loss, the GLBTQ community has all of those big issues to contend with, plus bigotry and injustice.

In fact, the problems are so enormous that our current problems will require the full strength and power of the presidency and the federal government, if there are even any solutions to be had.

In the meantime, a fight by the GLBT community for civil rights is not destructive of the new administration nor does it detract from solving other problems.

This is a legal fight and the gay rights movement is fighting it in the Courts and in legislatures.

I don’t confuse the inclination of folks to talk, debate and discuss in an on-line political forum as somehow detracting from the President Elect’s future ability to govern.

I don’t know what “the top issue in the USA today is.” I don’t post to mirror USA today head lines.

I'm a pragmatist too and I am prioritizing my fight, as others are free to do with their own agenda.

[AntiFascist]

81. Then why not focus on the other issues instead of this one?

We certainly don't have the power to "take down" Obama, and that certainly isn't my goal. I am very upset with his decision, however, and I will continue to voice my disapproval knowing full well that it will have little effect on his popularity.

The choice of Warren to give the invocation is a highly symbolic act that validates everything Warren stands for. This is very poor timing in light of the legal battles taking place in California to secure our rights. Many of us take this as a sign that Obama is willing to sacrifice our concerns in the GLBT community in order to ingratiate himself with certain evangelicals. Maybe this is a shrewd move on his part and will help him politically, but its not doing much for his character as far as I'm concerned.

[Orsino]

82. And now we know that some people can expect to be thrown under the bus for Obama's policy.

When he gets around to you on your issues, I'll listen sympathetically.

[Ian David]

84. How convenient for you. n/t

[lumberjack_jeff]

87. About THIS, reasonable people can disagree. n/t

[Honeycombe8]

89. True...keep our eye on the ball of healthcare and the economy and alternative energy.

These are the TOP issues, and Obama is on the progressive side of those issues. (Getting combat troops out of Iraq is tied in with the economy.)

He is also against Constitutional Amendments banning gay rights or gay marriage, which is all that matters in a President.

All is well, as far as his positions and intentions. It will be tough dealing with these issues, and he will have some battles with the Dem. Congress, as they seek to protect their own states' interests.

Here's hoping he can make headway.

[NJmaverick]

91. What it makes you is a reasoned person that cares about ALL Americans

not just a select few.

[jgraz]

92. And god forbid we talk about something besides the "top issue"

That's why DU has only one discussion forum: General Discussion -- TOP ISSUE.

:eyes:

[LibraLiz1973]

93. Some people do have a hard time walking and chewing gum at the same time...

:banghead:

[jgraz]

94. Hey, is chewing gum THE TOP ISSUE? No? Then STFU!!!!1111!!111

:P

[DailyGrind51]

95. Healthcare, jobs, ending the war(s), access to credit, green technology, are far more important!

[bluedawg12]

96. Far more important to what and to whom?