Obama Backs Gay Marriage

[Dani]

We all knew he did, but now he's said it. I think I might just weep a little more.

Great day today.

[KTC]

a wonderful day!

[Icedevimon]

Don't get me wrong, the clear affirmation that he believes LGBT people should be able to marry made me happy... but I have my doubts as to what he'll actually do to bring a measure forward. I'm not sure he'll actually take steps to legalize it. =x

[Dani]

Originally Posted by Icedevimon

Don't get me wrong, the clear affirmation that he believes LGBT people should be able to marry made me happy... but I have my doubts as to what he'll actually do to bring a measure forward. I'm not sure he'll actually take steps to legalize it. =x

I think it's our job to make it easy for him. We need to keep pushing it on States and fighting measures like Am#1 in NC.

[mscelina]

Hate to be the one to sound a tinge of doubt, but this President is the same man who as a candidate last time made all sorts of promises to the GLBT community that he did not keep. Now that we're getting close to his reelection bid, and his last term as President, he's starting to turn back to the GLBT community and seeking their support AGAIN. He still has not changed the Employee Non-Discrimination Act to include gay citizens, he still has not pushed for equality for same-sex couples within family law. And yet, all of a sudden, his opinion has finally evolved to the point that he supports gay marriage?

I'm sorry. I'd love to believe that the President is sincere. But I just can't. I believe that he's coming out in support of gay marriage now in order to galvanize the gay community's support for his re-election campaign, and I believe that after the election he will ignore GLBT issues entirely. If he REALLY believed in gay marriage, he would have followed through on his promises when the Dems controlled the house and wouldn't have sent Biden and minor officials out FIRST to test the political waters on the issue.

So yes, it's great to have a President and his administration come out and make comments like this and the GLBT community has every reason to be happy to hear this. But I will be heartily surprised if we hear anything more about it after November 6.

I like being surprised. We'll see what happens.

[Dani]

Originally Posted by mscelina

Hate to be the one to sound a tinge of doubt, but this President is the same man who as a candidate last time made all sorts of promises to the GLBT community that he did not keep. Now that we're getting close to his reelection bid, and his last term as President, he's starting to turn back to the GLBT community and seeking their support AGAIN. He still has not changed the Employee Non-Discrimination Act to include gay citizens, he still has not pushed for equality for same-sex couples within family law. And yet, all of a sudden, his opinion has finally evolved to the point that he supports gay marriage?

I'm sorry. I'd love to believe that the President is sincere. But I just can't. I believe that he's coming out in support of gay marriage now in order to galvanize the gay community's support for his re-election campaign, and I believe that after the election he will ignore GLBT issues entirely. If he REALLY believed in gay marriage, he would have followed through on his promises when the Dems controlled the house and wouldn't have sent Biden and minor officials out FIRST to test the political waters on the issue.

So yes, it's great to have a President and his administration come out and make comments like this and the GLBT community has every reason to be happy to hear this. But I will be heartily surprised if we hear anything more about it after November 6.

I like being surprised. We'll see what happens.

I hear you. I do. But I have to disagree. He is galvanizing, no doubt, but I've always believed he feels this way. I do think he has a host of issues that work against him and, as such, he has an almost morbid fear of alienating a great number of people.

Galvanizing the gay community won't do much for his election chances because in states where the votes count, this position on gay marriage is a negative factor. Ie: the swing states. Places like North Carolina and Ohio are not as forgiving and this was not an easy decision, nor a political win for him. This was dangerous and brave. That said, he wasn't given much of a choice. He was backed into a corner.

I think Obama does wrestle with this issue, what with him being a Christian. Luckily he has a strong and smart support system in Michele. While I'm not sure if he'll do much in the LGBT rights, I do believe this is an enormous step, just as Reagan saying AIDS for the first time was in 1984. The voice of the president is strong and I think we do a disservice when he makes one step and then we say 'it's not far enough'. It's enough for me to say, as a transgender person, that I'm proud of him.

[Icedevimon]

Yeah I'm pretty much in the middle. I supported him even before this and I will continue to support him. I can only hope that he'll do something about it. I don't fault him for not getting all the way last term. He did a lot for us, and he does have the republicans to fight against.

[mscelina]

Originally Posted by Dani

I hear you. I do. But I have to disagree. He is galvanizing, no doubt, but I've always believed he feels this way. I do think he has a host of issues that work against him and, as such, he has an almost morbid fear of alienating a great number of people.

Galvanizing the gay community won't do much for his election chances because in states where the votes count, this position on gay marriage is a negative factor. Ie: the swing states. Places like North Carolina and Ohio are not as forgiving and this was not an easy decision, nor a political win for him. This was dangerous and brave. That said, he wasn't given much of a choice. He was backed into a corner.

I think Obama does wrestle with this issue, what with him being a Christian. Luckily he has a strong and smart support system in Michele. While I'm not sure if he'll do much in the LGBT rights, I do believe this is an enormous step, just as Reagan saying AIDS for the first time was in 1984. The voice of the president is strong and I think we do a disservice when he makes one step and then we say 'it's not far enough'. It's enough for me to say, as a transgender person, that I'm proud of him.

*bolding mine*

You have every right to disagree. Just as I, living in Ohio, have the right (apparently) to be "not as forgiving" of his blatant pandering for votes with very little real progress once he was in the position to actually DO something about it. I gave up listening to what politicians claim during elections back in the eighties when people were threatening to kill us because we were daring to speak out against the government and the bigots during the AIDS crisis.

*shrug*

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me, right?

I will *never* believe a word that Barack Obama utters on behalf of the gay movement. I will believe, however, that this is a calculated campaign maneuver, tested by Biden and some minor officials in the Obama administration, to fool the gay community AGAIN to vote for all this hope, change and forwardness that ironically results in hopelessness, the same old same old, and backpedaling. Sure hope I'm wrong.

But I doubt it.

[leahzero]

It is what it is. A declaration of support, not a promise to fix everything that's wrong with the treatment of queer folk in this country.

Baby steps.

We needed this, and I'm proud to see it happen.

[Raventongue]

Considering what he has to put up with from the GOP, the fact that he's sane enough to do anything even remotely good astounds me.

But then, maybe I don't have as much right to decide how urgent the marriage issue is over there because I live somewhere where it's legal. Not that we don't have our own issues with the dang PM trying to de-legalize it every chance he gets.

As awesome as it would be for gay marriage to be legalized overnight, it'll take a lot longer than that. I won't say I'm pleased. But I'm grateful things aren't going backwards.

[Diana Hignutt]

Hey, must be time to start campaigning for president and playing politics with people's live again.

Fuck you, Barry, you're a fucking hypocrite.


That's what I think of his timely evolution.

[Gale Haut]

Originally Posted by Diana Hignutt

Hey, must be time to start campaigning for president and playing politics with people's live again.

Fuck you, Barry, you're a fucking hypocrite.


That's what I think of his timely evolution.

This was my gut reaction when I heard the news, and then I heard about Biden speaking out of turn and shaming Obama into making a statement.

[Sheryl Nantus]

Originally Posted by Gale Haut

This was my gut reaction when I heard the news, and then I heard about Biden speaking out of turn and shaming Obama into making a statement.

I'm naturally suspicious of all politicians.

If he had made it in a casual, common news conference along with other notes I'd be more interested.

Calling in Robin Roberts and giving a big, glossy interview to display his statement strikes me as a bit manufactured.

I guess the real question is - does it matter? Will it change anything? Does it carry any weight or will things go on as usual?

*shrugs*

[steamforged]

I'm with Dani here. While certain of President Obama's decisions have put me off, I've never felt betrayed by him as a queer person. His decision to speak up in our support gives me nothing but joy.

[mayqueen]

Originally Posted by leahzero

It is what it is. A declaration of support, not a promise to fix everything that's wrong with the treatment of queer folk in this country.

Baby steps.

We needed this, and I'm proud to see it happen.

I totally agree. I've had and will have my reservations about President Obama (he is a Chicago Democrat!), but it was a major cultural moment for the president of the US to make this statement. The international response has been really fun to watch. He may do nothing. He may do something. I don't know. But it means a lot to me to have heard those words come out of his mouth, careful and strategic as they were.

[Diana Hignutt]

Originally Posted by mayqueen

I totally agree. I've had and will have my reservations about President Obama (he is a Chicago Democrat!), but it was a major cultural moment for the president of the US to make this statement. The international response has been really fun to watch. He may do nothing. He may do something. I don't know. But it means a lot to me to have heard those words come out of his mouth, careful and strategic as they were.

I'm glad it brought you some joy. It was calculated to.

Words are easy. Actions are hard.

[Amadan]

I think it was political calculation, backed by honest beliefs. For the past 10-20 years there have probably been few politicians (even among Republicans) who genuinely care whether or not gays can marry. Most politicians will lean whichever way has less political liability - there are only a handful who (a) genuinely oppose gay marriage or (b) are brave enough to support it even when it is still a liability.

Obama made a calculation. It would have been nice if he'd just done the right thing because it was right, when it was right, not when he calculated it would gain him more votes than it would lose him. But, it's still a step forward. Even if it is an election year gambit, it's not an insignificant thing when the President of the United States openly voices his support.

[Diana Hignutt]

Originally Posted by Amadan

I think it was political calculation, backed by honest beliefs. For the past 10-20 years there have probably been few politicians (even among Republicans) who genuinely care whether or not gays can marry. Most politicians will lean whichever way has less political liability - there are only a handful who (a) genuinely oppose gay marriage or (b) are brave enough to support it even when it is still a liability.

Obama made a calculation. It would have been nice if he'd just done the right thing because it was right, when it was right, not when he calculated it would gain him more votes than it would lose him. But, it's still a step forward. Even if it is an election year gambit, it's not an insignificant thing when the President of the United States openly voices his support.

Yeah, you're right.

[Mara]

Well, Biden has apparently apologized to Obama for saying the right thing and making Obama look bad for not saying the right thing, forcing him to change his stance.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/10/politi...html?hpt=hp_t2

Not good, but it's better than Mitt Romney, who was one of the bullies that have contributed to PTSD and suicide rates for LGBT people so long, and who doesn't seem to think it was a big deal.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...unt/?hpt=hp_t2

So, basically, Obama is a little cowardly on the subject of gay marriage, and Romney is an unrepetent homophobic bully. It's still a pretty easy choice who to vote for.

[Diana Hignutt]

Originally Posted by Mara

Well, Biden has apparently apologized to Obama for saying the right thing and making Obama look bad for not saying the right thing, forcing him to change his stance.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/10/politi...html?hpt=hp_t2

Not good, but it's better than Mitt Romney, who was one of the bullies that have contributed to PTSD and suicide rates for LGBT people so long, and who doesn't seem to think it was a big deal.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...unt/?hpt=hp_t2

So, basically, Obama is a little cowardly on the subject of gay marriage, and Romney is an unrepetent homophobic bully. It's still a pretty easy choice who to vote for.

Gary Johnson?

[Mara]

Originally Posted by Diana Hignutt

Gary Johnson?

He's better on what we usually think of as social issues, but despite my frustration at anti-LGBT bigotry in our society, the most important social issue to me is also economic. Namely, the plight of poor people.

I can't trust a Libertarian candidate to properly take care of the poor. Not only that, but the Libertarian philosophy gives even more control of charity to private organizations who are often anti-LGBT, and LGBT people are unusually likely to be impoverished and need the help.

Economic conservatism is oppression when it doesn't properly help the poor, restrain corporations, or prevent social conservative organizations like Catholic Charities from getting control of huge swathes of homeless shelters and the like and letting them use that power as a bludgeon against anyone supporting LGBT rights.

So, Gary Johnson is a far worse option than Obama, though probably better than Romney. (I'm not sure. Romney's such a flip-flopper that for all I know, he might be better than Johnson on economic issues if he gets into office. Whereas I think it's nearly impossible that Romney would flip-flop on social issues when his base seems to be the party of social conservatism.)

*sighs*

What we really need is a true progressive in office, and more importantly, the support system to give them power to get things done. It really doesn't matter what any Democratic president wants to do if conservative Democratic churches are going to undermine them and Blue Dogs won't support their policies.

[Diana Hignutt]

Originally Posted by Mara

He's better on what we usually think of as social issues, but despite my frustration at anti-LGBT bigotry in our society, the most important social issue to me is also economic. Namely, the plight of poor people.

I can't trust a Libertarian candidate to properly take care of the poor. Not only that, but the Libertarian philosophy gives even more control of charity to private organizations who are often anti-LGBT, and LGBT people are unusually likely to be impoverished and need the help.

Economic conservatism is oppression when it doesn't properly help the poor, restrain corporations, or prevent social conservative organizations like Catholic Charities from getting control of huge swathes of homeless shelters and the like and letting them use that power as a bludgeon against anyone supporting LGBT rights.

So, Gary Johnson is a far worse option than Obama, though probably better than Romney. (I'm not sure. Romney's such a flip-flopper that for all I know, he might be better than Johnson on economic issues if he gets into office. Whereas I think it's nearly impossible that Romney would flip-flop on social issues when his base seems to be the party of social conservatism.)

*sighs*

What we really need is a true progressive in office, and more importantly, the support system to give them power to get things done. It really doesn't matter what any Democratic president wants to do if conservative Democratic churches are going to undermine them and Blue Dogs won't support their policies.

I don't really see Obama restraining corporations or helping the poor in any meaningful way (aside from obama phones), but otherwise I agree with your analysis.

[Kim Fierce]

the cynical part of me wants to think it's only political strategy . . . but no one has ever said they support gay marriage for STRATEGY!

[Medievalist]

I don't particularly care about the why; I want same sex marriage recognized in all 50 states, D.C, and DOMA overturned.

And a pony. With curly hair.

[Alessandra Kelley]

Originally Posted by mayqueen

I totally agree. I've had and will have my reservations about President Obama (he is a Chicago Democrat!), but it was a major cultural moment for the president of the US to make this statement. The international response has been really fun to watch. He may do nothing. He may do something. I don't know. But it means a lot to me to have heard those words come out of his mouth, careful and strategic as they were.

I'm sorry, I must take exception to this statement. Barack Obama has represented first my neighborhood, then my state, then my country, for the last fifteen years. He has never, ever been a part of the notorious Chicago Democratic Machine.

When he was only a local politician, Obama was renowned for being thoughtful, careful, sincere, and hard-working. The Chicago Machine Democrats mocked him as a goody-two-shoes, snubbed him, and deliberately kept him away from all their sweetheart deals and backroom dealings. He had nothing to do with them, and they had nothing to do with him. (Seriously, our streets never got ploughed after snowstorms, even, until Obama was elected president).

It pains me to see people brand him as a "Chicago Democrat" as if he were one of those backside-kissing, cigar-chomping, fat-cat Daley suck-ups. He got where he did no thanks to them.

I have found Obama frustratingly slow on a lot of issues, and I hardly dare to speak on something which affects so many of you so personally and me only tangentially, but I do think he has done a good thing here.