Obama endorses same-sex marriage

[matriculated]

Well, I don't see this posted anywhere else, and the talking heads keep blabbering about it, so what do we think?

He's been "evolving" on this issue for some time. Apparently the evolution is finished and he has reached his conclusion.

Equality for all? Treat others as you want to be treated?

Or heinous attack on traditional values?

[C-dub]

Today.

Wait until he goes to a conservative leaning state that he needs. There's no telling what he'll believe then.

[Heartland Patriot]

Some site called "Gawker" already called him out on his speech for not being hard-core enough FOR "same-sex marriage"...the whole darned thing is nothing more than election year vote gathering, just like them two that were pushing that "cut-off-Federal-funding-to-stand-your-ground-states" thing that got retracted.

[puma guy]

It's called pandering. It's what politicians do! Wait til a PETA fanatic want's to marry a horse.

[matriculated]

Some site called "Gawker" already called him out on his speech for not being hard-core enough FOR "same-sex marriage"...the whole darned thing is nothing more than election year vote gathering, just like them two that were pushing that "cut-off-Federal-funding-to-stand-your-ground-states" thing that got retracted.

From Gawker:

Well, before Roe v. Wade, abortion was a state-by-state issue, too. So was slavery. There are 44 states in which gay men and women are currently barred from marrying one another. Obama's position is that, while he would have voted the other way, those 44 states are perfectly within their rights to arbitrarily restrict the access of certain individuals to marriage rights based solely on their sexual orientation.

[matriculated]

It's called pandering. It's what politicians do! Wait til a PETA fanatic want's to marry a horse.

If endorsing same-sex marriage is considered pandering, then surely the country must have underwent a huge metamorphosis on the issue. Just 5-10 years ago pandering on this issue would have been impossible because the majority of the public was against same-sex marriage. Gallup says that half the country is for, 48% against, with the long-term trend clearly painting a picture of inevitability in one direction.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/154529/Half- ... riage.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[The Mad Moderate]

It's called pandering. It's what politicians do! Wait til a PETA fanatic want's to marry a horse.

Yeah because a guy marrying a horse is exactly the same a two men that want to have the same rights as a man and woman.

[Heartland Patriot]

It's called pandering. It's what politicians do! Wait til a PETA fanatic want's to marry a horse.

If endorsing same-sex marriage is considered pandering, then surely the country must have underwent a huge metamorphosis on the issue. Just 5-10 years ago pandering on this issue would have been impossible because the majority of the public was against same-sex marriage. Gallup says that half the country is for, 48% against, with the long-term trend clearly painting a picture of inevitability in one direction.

Yeah, that's just SO wonderful I forgot to get excited about it...

BTW, its all in how the question gets asked that decides how people respond to it...

[C-dub]

It's called pandering. It's what politicians do! Wait til a PETA fanatic want's to marry a horse.

Yeah because a guy marrying a horse is exactly the same a two men that want to have the same rights as a man and woman.

I bet Cass Sunstein would have pushed for it had he been confirmed.

[matriculated]

BTW, its all in how the question gets asked that decides how people respond to it...

Obviously. But the question's been asked many different ways across many different polling organizations for many years. The long-term trend is undeniable. It's a matter of when, not if. America is changing. I understand some may be uncomfortable with that, but others call that progress. Some were uncomfortable with desegregation. Someone will always be "uncomfortable."

[Heartland Patriot]

BTW, its all in how the question gets asked that decides how people respond to it...

Obviously. But the question's been asked many different ways across many different polling organizations for many years. The long-term trend is undeniable. It's a matter of when, not if. America is changing. I understand some may be uncomfortable with that, but others call that progress. Some were uncomfortable with desegregation. Someone will always be "uncomfortable."

Yep, because whenever the left wants something, they get it using methods codified by the Frankfurt School and Saul Alinsky...y'all can reap the rewards of cultural Marxism breaking down society, but I don't have to like this so-called "progress"; call me names, I'm way past caring...won't it be SO nice when everyone is "just the same"? Like ants or bees...

[matriculated]

BTW, its all in how the question gets asked that decides how people respond to it...

Obviously. But the question's been asked many different ways across many different polling organizations for many years. The long-term trend is undeniable. It's a matter of when, not if. America is changing. I understand some may be uncomfortable with that, but others call that progress. Some were uncomfortable with desegregation. Someone will always be "uncomfortable."

Yep, because whenever the left wants something, they get it using methods codified by the Frankfurt School and Saul Alinsky...y'all can reap the rewards of cultural Marxism breaking down society, but I don't have to like this so-called "progress"; call me names, I'm way past caring...won't it be SO nice when everyone is "just the same"? Like ants or bees...

"Just the same," as in everybody has the same rights? That doesn't make us bees, that makes us Americans. Equal protection under the law.

[C-dub]

BTW, its all in how the question gets asked that decides how people respond to it...

Obviously. But the question's been asked many different ways across many different polling organizations for many years. The long-term trend is undeniable. It's a matter of when, not if. America is changing. I understand some may be uncomfortable with that, but others call that progress. Some were uncomfortable with desegregation. Someone will always be "uncomfortable."

This may be true, but I don't think it will be for a while yet. Over thirty states have put this on ballots in recent years and same sex marriage has lost every time despite what any poll says. So, people may say they are for it or okay with it, but when it comes to brass tacks they vote against it. Even liberal Komiefornia voted against it and were told by the liberal 9th Circuit that they were unconstitutional.

[matriculated]

BTW, its all in how the question gets asked that decides how people respond to it...

Obviously. But the question's been asked many different ways across many different polling organizations for many years. The long-term trend is undeniable. It's a matter of when, not if. America is changing. I understand some may be uncomfortable with that, but others call that progress. Some were uncomfortable with desegregation. Someone will always be "uncomfortable."

This may be true, but I don't think it will be for a while yet. Over thirty states have put this on ballots in recent years and same sex marriage has lost every time despite what any poll says. So, people may say they are for it or okay with it, but when it comes to brass tacks they vote against it. Even liberal Komiefornia voted against it and were told by the liberal 9th Circuit that they were unconstitutional.

You're right C-dub. Every single time this issue has been put in front of the voters, they have voted same-sex marriage down. Six of the ten most crucial swing states have passed constitutional amendments prohibiting same-sex marriage. So what does all of that tell us about Obama's statement today? How can it be pandering when the majority of swing states have constitutional amendments against the position he took? Isn't that political courage? Or stupidity?

Either way, whatever the state-by-state results may be, the long-term national trends cannot be overruled. The fact is that it is a matter of when, not if, and as you say C-dub, it may take some time. Maybe a generation, maybe two. But I venture to guess one generation will be what it takes. This has picked up serious speed now and is hurling downhill with unstoppable force.

[mamabearCali]

(shrug). He just made official what we all knew. The non-defense of DOMA and then the allowing of gays into the military was a dead give away. Wasn't going to vote for him anyway. Politically it gains him a few donors, but he loses a bit of the Latino and possibly a bit of the black vote, perhaps loses what was left of his practicing catholic vote....the two Sunday a year crowd won't care. Between this and the contraception mandate Obama has slapped them in the face pretty bad so that vote is gone.

The nationwide poll may be evenly split, but when people vote on it. They vote to keep marriage between one man and be woman.