Discussions
Obama Against Gay Marriage- What he had to say
Posted by DocKC • 11/03/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: obama
I heard it with my own ears and saw it come from his own mouth on MTV in a one on one interview with Senator Obama.
Obama said he is against gay marriage and he would vote against the ammendment approving gay marriages. How do you feel about this? Please share.
I tried to post the video of the actual interview, but it wouldn't let me. You can find it on www.mtvnews.com.
Just looking for thoughts about this as I've heard that many don't know this about Obama.
User Comments
-
I was aware of this when I cast my vote, and while his lack of support on this particularly divisive issue is a bit troubling, and given his general support of most all of the other gay rights issues I chose to go ahead and give him my vote because I believe he can be the great healer we need after the 8 years of incompetence, arrogance and at times outright disdain and abuse we Americans have been subjected to by the Bush administrations. -
FWIW this has already been posted to the political forum so there are comments there to view also, and Obama has said where he stands more than once.
The entire quote is below:
Senator and Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama openly opposed California's Proposition 8 in a Saturday interview with MTV.
"I've stated my opposition to this," the Senator said in response to a question from a viewer in San Leandro, California. "I think it's unnecessary. I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, and I'm not in favor of gay marriage, but when you start playing around with constitutions just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person...it just seems to me that that's not what America is about. Usually, our constitutions expand liberties, they don't contract them."
pageoneq.com/news/2008/obama_prop8.html
From the transcript:
Obama: I have stated my opposition to that. I think it is unnecessary. I believe that marriage is between a man and woman and I am not in favor of gay marriage, but when you're playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that that is not what America is about. Usually constitutions expand liberties, they don't contract them. What I believe is that if we have strong civil unions out there that provide legal rights to same-sex couples that they can visit each other in the hospital if they get sick, that they can transfer property to each other. If they've got benefits, they can make sure those benefits apply to their partners. I think that is the direction we need to go. I think young people are ahead of the curve on this, for the most part. I think their attitude generally is, "We should be respectful of all people," and that is the kind of politics I want to practice.
Sway: So you would vote ...
Obama: I would vote no on the proposition.-
So what if it has already been posted, it is alright for BC members to post and ask the question again that isn't a violation of BC rules is it? -
This interview that I just saw he did not say anything about the "playing around part..." He very clearly said he would vote against the ammendment to make it legal. Period. www.mtvnews.com.
I brought this up as many of the people I have spoken to said one of the reasons they are voting for Obama is because he is NOT against gay marriage. Just wanted them to be aware of what I heard come from his mouth.
He can twist words in each and every speech and people will grab on and use each and every word. Just as you have posted that link about him saying something different than what he clearly stated in this interview. Always something different.
Sorry if this topic was already posted. I didn't know that as I'm not in every forum. Can't always be original. Just wanted to hear what others had to say on this topic. Yes, I took a chance...a big chance...but hey...what the heck.
-
The amendment is to making it ILLEGAL, not to make it legal. So, while he said he was against gay marriage--as he has before--he also said that he was against the anti-gay marriage amendement. -
"So what if it has already been posted, it is alright for BC members to post and ask the question again that isn't a violation of BC rules is it?"
Well, in the sense that admin has asked about fifty times that we keep political postings on the political board and off the main boards, yes, it is.
-
-
I thought this was hinted at in the first debate. -
@kc
IMO the number 1 issue in the Presidential Election is NOT proposition 8 in California. IMO any adult who casts his or her vote based on a federal candidate's stand on a single issue on a proposition being voted on in California ie. at the state level is off-base.-
@ Timethief- I "hear" you and what you say is perfectly fine. I'm not saying anything about what people should look at....I strictly started this discussion about ONE single topic, not the entire election and who people should vote for.
My intent was to ONLY bring up the fact of what his view was on gay marriage. It was to make those who are UNAWARE of one single fact that he said, now aware. AND that was because I heard many people say to me that they wanted him as president because he was NOT opposed. Hope you understand my intent. I never even said for whom I voted or for whom anyone else should vote.
-
-
@kc
IMO the number 1 issue Presidential Election is NOT either Obama's or McCain's stand on proposition 8 in California. IMO any American who casts his or her vote based on a federal candidate's stand on a single issue must be obsessed with that single issue and is unwilling or unable unable to look at the larger picture an examine the stand of the candiates on all of the issues. -
@ Kevin- I don't know what is acceptable or not. I used to get myself into a lot of trouble in forums. LMAO....bringing up things and people screaming at me in debate. I had to learn the hard way not to get emotional about it.
So, I bring up the facts and stay neutral and let the chips fall where they may. And ALWAYS keep smiling....people can get very emotional in here with their opinions. I still love everyone though...:)-
@DocKC
There's no rule against posting to both forums. I just wanted to make you aware that this issue has been discussed is being discussed in the political forum too. Perhaps you and others would like to read what's already been posted there or perhaps not.
I know you love me and the others too. Sadly not everyone is as loving as you are. Regarding being emotional. The political forum is very active and we have resident right wing religious members who have been are constantly clanging away on this topic and on abortion for months on end.
If I speak in the languages of humans and angels but have no love, I have become a reverberating gong or a clanging cymbal. 1 Corinthians 13:1 -
@Doc,
I hear you also, let cooler heads prevail
-
-
What amendment making it legal would he vote against? I don't believe any have been proposed.
You misunderstood the interview. The amendment in question is Amendment 8 in California which would make gay marriage illegal, and Obama has said that he would vote against THAT.-
@drjay
Correct
-
-
Both politicians running for the Presidency have the same view on gay marriage. It is the politically correct thing to say if you are a politician.-
BINGO!
-
That's an interesting take, given the huge number of average Americans who say the same thing in conversation and in forums like this. Are they just being politically correct, too, or is it a legitimate view to hold unless you're a politician?
-
I think that politicians are being politically correct about it, because even if they did favor gay marriage, and would like to see it legalized, they wouldn't admit to it publicly.
You and I have a lot more leeway than politicians and public figures do with regards to voicing our opinions.
-
-
@randy
Just bringing up something that many people to whom I have spoken were misinformed about.-
Right, but as I pointed out, you yourself misunderstood what Obama said in the interview. The amendment he would vote against is anti-gay marriage, not pro-gay marriage.
There is no amendment to make it legal for him to oppose. -
DocKC
Proposition 8 is worded to eliminate same sex marriage by limiting "marriage" only to being between a man and a woman.
Obama said "I would vote no on the proposition"
"From the transcript:
Obama: I have stated my opposition to that. I think it is unnecessary. I believe that marriage is between a man and woman and I am not in favor of gay marriage, but when you're playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that that is not what America is about. Usually constitutions expand liberties, they don't contract them. What I believe is that if we have strong civil unions out there that provide legal rights to same-sex couples that they can visit each other in the hospital if they get sick, that they can transfer property to each other. If they've got benefits, they can make sure those benefits apply to their partners. I think that is the direction we need to go. I think young people are ahead of the curve on this, for the most part. I think their attitude generally is, "We should be respectful of all people," and that is the kind of politics I want to practice.
Sway: So you would vote ...
Obama: I would vote no on the proposition."
You've got this backwards.
Obama said he said he would vote against the amendment BANNING same sex marriages.
He did NOT say he against an amendment APPROVING same sex marriages.
-
-
No, I didn't misunderstand. I heard exactly what he said and know exactly what he meant.
-
Then why did you claim that he said this in your initial post? "and he would vote against the ammendment approving gay marriages"
-
He said he would vote against the amendment BANNING gay marriages, not against an amendment APPROVING gay marriages.
-
-
@Timethief
Yes, I know how you are and love you still.
This I learned:
If I speak in the languages of humans and angels but have no love, I have become a reverberating gong or a clanging cymbal. 1 Corinthians 13:1
I on the other hand am different than you are and refuse to debate and/or get emotional. Perhaps we should indeed leave this discussion for the political forum. You're right about that...
I knew I was taking a chance and now would like to have this discussion deleted. LMAO....can that be done?-
This is the contact link for Admin www.blogcatalog.com/contact/
-
Do you want this discussion deleted because now your foot is in your mouth after realizing the truth? Don't blame ya.
-
-
LMFAO...I'm outta here....Not going back to a few months ago...You all scare me out really quickly...I forgot this isn't for me. But I say that with a huge smile because I will never be upset in these forums. Much bigger fish to fry.
Peace out, my friends. -
@ timethief
thank you-
@KC
♥ you
-
-
Alright - so I'm confused. What did the OP try to clear up and what was the end result?
-
Proposition 8 is worded to eliminate same sex marriage by limiting "marriage" only to being between a man and a woman.
Obama said "I would vote no on the proposition"
"From the transcript:
Obama: I have stated my opposition to that. I think it is unnecessary. I believe that marriage is between a man and woman and I am not in favor of gay marriage, but when you're playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that that is not what America is about. Usually constitutions expand liberties, they don't contract them. What I believe is that if we have strong civil unions out there that provide legal rights to same-sex couples that they can visit each other in the hospital if they get sick, that they can transfer property to each other. If they've got benefits, they can make sure those benefits apply to their partners. I think that is the direction we need to go. I think young people are ahead of the curve on this, for the most part. I think their attitude generally is, "We should be respectful of all people," and that is the kind of politics I want to practice.
Sway: So you would vote ...
Obama: I would vote no on the proposition."
The OP was confused and got this backwards.
Obama said he said he would vote against the amendment which proposes BANNING same sex marriages.
He did NOT say he would vote against an amendment APPROVING same sex marriages. -
I was about to vote for McCain...glad she (or someone) cleared this up for me (and her)!
-
clear up? you have to be kidding this was done simply to muddy the waters. For the record it has absolutely no bearing on what a president believes when it comes down to marriage since the courts time and time again have ruled it a state issue.
You are also very unlikely to ever see the supreme court ever touch this issue either. The conservatives on the court don't want it there because it would force an decision on whether marriage is a religious institution or a secular one. The liberals don't want to tackle it either because they are afraid of winning as they are losing. A win for gay marriage in the SCOTUS means opening up all sorts of alternative marriage arrangements not even the most open minded on the court wants to see. -
[A win for gay marriage in the SCOTUS means opening up all sorts of alternative marriage arrangements not even the most open minded on the court wants to see.]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope#The_slippery_slope_as_fallacy
1. A has occurred (or will or might occur); therefore
2. B will inevitably happen. (slippery slope)
3. B is wrong; therefore
4. A is wrong. (straw man) -
False assumption by the court's liberals or not it is still a reality. The moment the federal government claims jurisdiction on the rules of marriage then it not the state governments immediately has to legislate and pass those rules into law. If you don't think that is a slippery slope with all sorts of implications you have ever paid too much attention to what politicians do on a day to day basis.
-
-
Gay marriage is wrong, as I believe the very concept of marriage is for procreation and as such should be between a man and a woman. I am however opposed to discrimination against Gays and Lesbians. I do not approve of the lifestyle and I get quite miffed at people who compare being gay to being black. That really irks me.-
Sterile people shouldn't get married?
-
Like Blacks..gays cannot change. Can you justify your disapproval of gay marriage other than religious belief or personal dislike?
-
wrong, the concept of marriage is for family ties under the eyes of god. -
But by that definition, you would have to say which god and then prove that the aforementioned deity exists.
-
and thats the problem everyone of any faith seem to have
-
He is right; marriage, man, woman, god, the whole ball of wax. Before you attack I am a non believer. He is right that that this is a religious institution and one the government, not just the state of this or that or the federal government have any business meddling in at all. Every level of government needs to get out of the marriage business and leave it where it belongs in the hands of the religious.
That said the government has a responsibility to promote the general welfare of its people. Time and time again it has been proven children raised in families with two parents fare better in life and are more productive their entire lives, not just straight families, but families with two parental figures. As such the government has a duty to strengthen that bond. They have a duty to ensure that anyone that wants to be a family is treated as spouses, not as married couples, but as spouses in a family. It is time to do away with marriage completely and institute civil union/domestic partnership/(some new trendy buzzword) for everyone who wants to be a family. -
If that's true, then why are there tax benefits for married couples?
-
Bradbart said, "He is right that that [marriage] is a religious institution [...]"
Citation, please. -
If you need a citation for marriage being a religious institution then you obviously need to do a lot more reading before you can even begin to speak intelligently on this subject.
-
Bradhart. I'm aware of the reach that religious has had within the institution of marriage within North America (and the world, really) - but to suggest religion is from where the need for marriage spawned is an ethnocentric perception at best. Take a look at cultural anthropology. And yes, I asked a question not to berate you but because I do want information if it conflicts with mine. I am always open to receiving new information, but if I do that for everyone that states something, then it would get a little messy after a while. It may just be so that I need to do more reading on the subject - but since you're here, and you offered some information, I didn't think there'd be any harm in asking where you received this information. Share, you greedy knowledge keeper.
-
-
@voodooKobra
Now we are delving into the abyss of minimal semantics, aren't we?-
You say semantics, I say basic logic.
[Gay marriage is wrong.]
Why is it wrong?
[I believe the very concept of marriage is for procreation and as such should be between a man and a woman.]
What about heterosexual couples that don't have children? Aren't they disqualified?
-
-
@Markprogue
Why limit it to Blacks? What about Jews and while we are at it, Gypsies also. This is where the argument becomes absurd when you compare a lifestyle choice to a race. I actually do know a lot of people who were once gay and are not that way anymore. One of them is actually a renowned Pastor Donnie McClurkin. You can Google him and read about his story.-
[lifestyle choice]
Nobody chooses to be gay. I never chose to be heterosexual. Did you?
[I actually do know a lot of people who were once gay and are not that way anymore.]
They're suppressing their urges.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation -
hahaha!!! those guys get enough shit as it is.
also i think you mean culture and not race -
It's a lifestyle choice?? You mean a gay can convert to being a heterosexual like Ted Haggard or Larry Craig???
NOBODY chose to be hetero, did you? -
Mark:
Of course it's a lifestyle choice! They choose to do what satisfies their biological urges that doesn't hurt anyone else. Choice. See?
</sarcasm> -
No, being gay is not a lifestyle choice any more than your race is a lifestyle choice.
Being apart of flamboyant gay culture however, is. But that brings up the question as to why it's OK to discriminate based on lifestyle choices, such as religion, profession, political persuasion, sexual interests (gay or straight) or hobbies.
And marriage was originally about procreation AND more importantly, the transference of property. Specifically, the transference of property from father to son - should his wife be skilled/lucky enough to bear him a son. (If not, the property would be transferred to a son in law by way of marriage, thus solidifying the family lineage).
For royalty, marriage was all about political alliances. -
[But that brings up the question as to why it's OK to discriminate based on lifestyle choices, such as religion, profession, political persuasion, sexual interests (gay or straight) or hobbies.]
Damn good question. I'm glad I'm not on that side of the debate.
-
It's a question that rarely gets answered, Voodoo.
I always ask, if you believe homosexuality is a choice, then lets see what other non criminal lifestyle choices we make daily are also discriminated against, religion? Nope. Political affiliation? Nope, musical taste, fashion, or genre? Nope...they can all still enter into marriage contracts as long as they're adults! -
But Rock and Roll is the music of the devil. We all know that.
-
*Holds up metal devil fingers and head bangs*
-
@ zaboye..
“Ex-Gay” Donnie McClurkin is Not So “Ex-Gay”
bloggernista.com/2007/10/26/ex-gay-donnie-mcclurkin-is-not-so-ex-gay/ -
Zaboye said, "This is where the argument becomes absurd when you compare a lifestyle choice to a race."
Why? They're both genetic factors. And of course people can do things you perceive as gay without actually preferring to be gay. (Sexual preference vs. sexual orientation.) Look at the Sambia that drink semen from men and go on to marry women. (Only 2% went on to become gay willingly..'full-time').
Not to mention, if I were to become a preacher and I used to do 'gay' things, I'd probably say I didn't yearn for the pen*s anymore, too. I mean, I want as many people in my congregation there so I can get their tithe. (I suppose I could be an openly gay preacher, but that's just a bit harder.)
-
-
@Siralmo,
Being Black or African is not a culture, it is a race, point of correction. The way of life, traditions and heritage is what typifies and encapsulates the culture.-
It's a race? Are you sure? Last time I checked, they were homo sapien.
Race, as you use it, is nothing more than a social construct. It's a divisive device; an idea that pits man against man in a struggle over individual differences. Race, as I use it, is synonymous with species. -
hahaha!! sure you keep telling yourself that...
your definition of culture is correct therefore i stand by my statement -
Erm, isn't there more than one culture in Africa? More than one belief system and background? Which "African" traditions and heritage do you mean - Egyptian? South African? Nigerian? -
Sh, don't try to be logical.
-
-
voodooKobra wrote:
"Of course it's a lifestyle choice! They choose to do what satisfies their biological urges that doesn't hurt anyone else. Choice. See?"
Never mind the 'sarcasm' disclaimer, you actually buttressed my point and by default the counter to your supposed logic. God help us if we were all to submit to every crazed biological or emotional urges we feel. I believe that's why we are on "twos" and not "fours".-
HERE COMES THE CLUE TRAIN!
If their urges are ingrained in their biology, and humans were created by a god, then your god created them that way.
Being gay harms nobody. Our planet is overpopulated anyway, so to hell with your procreation line.
Also, down with all forms of marriage. -
Hiding behind the Bible to justify your hatred? Now...conparing gays to animals???
-
Well, he also stated that the urges hurt no one else - which suggests that crazy urges are an exception to what he said.
-
Thank you, Anok. I glossed over that detail in his response. My BS detector needs a resolution upgrade, it seems.
-
-
@zaboye where are you from? (e.g. country, heritage etc.)
-
Race, a social construct? What arrant hissicuff. Where did you come up with that?!
Race is a biological construct steeped in hereditary delineations and intentionally misread by social and cultural idiosyncrasies.-
However, a black person and a white person are so genetically similar that they can reproduce with each other. Therefore, they are of the same species (race).
-
No he's right.
Race (as it is commonly used) is a socially constructed ideal based on ethnicity, heritage and culture (And stereotypes for some).
Ethnicity is what you inherit from your parents genes. -
What constitutes a race?
Am I black because I have some black ancestors? I look pretty white, but I have seen the photo evidence and documentation from the 1860's and 1870's that tell a very different story for both sides of my family. More to the point I have seen the later photo evidence and documentation on my mother's side that shows my Cheyenne and Sioux heritage. If we want to go with just the researched ancestry you can tie me to Moorish and Sephardic ancestors from Spain. What box do I check when it asks for race? None of your damned business.
In the end race is a social construct meant for the single purpose of discrimination. Go back far enough and we are all mongrels of some sort. -
Also, every American is an African American because the human race originated in Africa.
-
-
MarkPogue
"Hiding behind the Bible to justify your hatred? Now...comparing gays to animals???"
Please point to the specter of intelligible hatred I displayed on this matter and while you are at it, I also would ask that you please show where or how I compared gays to animals?-
from you...
I believe that's why we are on "twos" and not "fours". -
I believe it was in response to you stating that acting on urges (that hurt no one else, meaning in context, homosexual acts) was akin to walking on all fours, like animals.
-
Which is stupid, because human genetics have evolved to walk on two feet. It's a biological urge.
-
-
Hmmmmmm ... forget TV! This is entertainment!
*grabs some popcorn*-
TV sucks. Everyone knows that. I think it was the "I eat pancakes" Windows Vista commercial that finally drove the last nail into TV's coffin.
-
Really? I think it was the first reality show that did that. Or, wait that might have been the first nail.
-
You're right. That means Microsoft is corpsehumping.
-
i agree with that
-
And the result is a nicely decorated batch of Windows EXEs that don't quite work.
-
I was enjoying the SNL political bash, though.
-
Anok: Well, there is the occasional glimmer of hope on TV, here and there. But it's quickly overshadowed by what's on during the rest of the day.
-
oh, see now, I'm immersed in the world of Thomas the Train, My little ponies, Imagination movers, and Caillou. regular adult geared TV all looks pretty good after a while
-
LOL, okay. I see what you mean.
-
Oh great it's fallacious argument night.
A fallacy is, very generally, an error in reasoning. This differs from a factual error, which is simply being wrong about the facts. To be more specific, a fallacy is an “argument” in which the premises given for the conclusion do not provide the needed degree of support. A deductive fallacy is a deductive argument that is invalid (it is such that it could have all true premises and still have a false conclusion). An inductive fallacy is less formal than a deductive fallacy. They are simply “arguments” which appear to be inductive arguments, but the premises do not provided enough support for the conclusion. In such cases, even if the premises were true, the conclusion would not be more likely to be true. — Dr. Michael C. Labossiere in Fallacies www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
-
-
MarkPogue
"from you...
I believe that's why we are on "twos" and not "fours"."
Thanks for the rather cogent evidential information. I had forgotten that delineation was akin to insinuation. (lost for words)-
Context is everything.
-
If you're at a loss for words, you should spend your period of speechlessness reading a book.
Or Wikipedia:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation -
pfft blog post.... are you kidding???
i dont want to hear the ramblings of a random trying to inflate their own sense intellectuality
EDIT
*********************
and then you remove the blog post -
I tend to edit discussion posts a lot.
-
This thread would be more fun to read if post editing were disabled
-
-
We should worry about the economy at this time.-
But we have to bicker about something at the moment. I mean, the election is tomorrow - all debate on that is pretty much moot at this time.
-
election???
-
In the US, anyway.
(As if you haven't heard about it until you absolutely wanted to vomit ) -
its rediculous how much we hear about it...
i hope they both get shot right before the results are draw.... (not really :P, just to mix it up a little) -
ouch!
That's why we moved political bickering to a different board - to help save the sanity of everyone else -
siralmo: If something like that happens, I'll be quoting you. A properly attributed quote, of course
-
of course *nods and exchange of handshake in agreement*
-
-
@voodooKobra'
Please do not insult me. We can disagree without being disagreable. Sometimes, this is the problem with flaming liberals and right wing neo-cons. You expect everyone to agree with you and if they don't, they are damned. I can assure you that I will not look to you for intellectual discernment.-
Insult you? If I wanted to insult you I would say you're so fat you redshift the entire galaxy. Or something equally silly.
-
flaming liberals and right wing neo-cons
If you were indeed looking for intellectual discernment, IMO you would have a hard time locating it, as your head appears to be wedged so far up your backside that vision would not be possible. -
Usually if you want to insult someone, it's best to use terminology that's commonly understood.
-
We were called, and still are called flaming liberals when we voice our opinion for equal rights. All minority groups should have equal rights for marriage, pay, etc.
We ALL pay taxes. -
MadameX: Yeah, but all of my friends know what a redshift is so it's legal.
-
-
Here's a question: If it's possible for a homosexual to "choose" to be heterosexual, then wouldn't the opposite hold true? Could any of you bend over in front of Bubba GreaseYourAss and enjoy it? I doubt it.
-
what???
-
I'm trying to express the incredulity of the "lifestyle choice" argument.
-
He's made the argument that if homosexuality is a choice, than anyone can choose to be gay.
-
I guess class is not a word you relate to. You have a pleasant evening.
-
Class? Where I come from, we don't have a caste system. Unless you're trying to be a classy pseudointellectual. If it's the latter, you're wasting your time. Fancy words crumble before impeccable logic.
... Not to say my logic IS impeccable, but I try. -
What does having class have to do with his question?
-
@voodoocobra look at the profile pic, i would say so
-
-
Wikipedia... LOL, and that's where you get your information. Bet you wrote 90% of that hogwash. LMAO
-
No, I don't get my information from there. However, it's a good place to start if you want to look at the topics discussed and begin your own research.
Yes. Research. If you want to debate, do some f'ing research. -
hey if you have a different opinion you can set up an account and change it yourself
-
Wait a minute - you slam Voododo for being disagreeable, then mock him over Wikipedia?
-
Better than a Bible.
-
Characteristic of all trolls, it came it broke wind and it left a gaseous cloud of vapor behind.
Edit: Strike that it's back. Where's that matchbox.
-
-
And oh btw, I restate again that I oppose any discriminatory laws against Gays and Lesbians, but believe as a Christian that it is morally wrong and is a lifestyle choice.
-
Then define what is morally right, and prove that it's a choice.
[So freaking sue me!]
Classy. -
removed by author
-
I'm very happy to hear that you can separate your opinions from law sthat affect others who do not share your world view.
That's good!
-
-
Can't we all just get along.......
-
Isn't that what the liberal hippies and gay rights protesters have been saying for, say, 40 years now?
-
no ones fighting here, opinions are opinions
-
I hear a clanging cymbal.
-
-
Just voted for Bob Barr btw.... He is a big time Gay Rights advocate
-
Congratulations.
-
removed by author to save Admin the trouble of doing so later on
-
uhoh!! is someone trying to backpedal??
-
-
@Siralmo,
Sure you don't believe Mr. Down in the Georgia Peach ultraconservative is a Gay Rights advocate, do you?-
you might have to explain that one in a little more depth
-
BTW, you mentioned Donnie McClurkin and how he conquered homosexuality....
McClurkin has made remarks claiming that he is in a “war” with homosexuality and that homosexuality is not God’s intention. He is scheduled to perform at an event for the Barack Obama campaign in South Carolina. Barack is not scheduled to attend the event and has added an openly gay minister to deliver the opening prayer
bloggernista.com/2007/10/26/ex-gay-donnie-mcclurkin-is-not-so-ex-gay/
In other words...he's not cured.
-
-
I have to wonder why you chose to bring this up the day before the election.
It's not like McCain is pro-gay marriage, so it can't be to steer people towards McCain's alternative...is it just to smear Obama to make him appear not as liberal as some of us seem to think? Just a little gratuitous mud spatter in his direction the night before the election?
Let's avoid that nasty word "lie" and just say you "misquoted" him as being against gay marriage when, in fact, he was saying he was against a measure banning gay marriage. So...what's your point in putting this discussion up in the first place?-
The problem here is everyone wants to assume that what he believes affects legal realities. A lot of people don't believe in interracial marriage still, but they accept that it is legal right.
-
-
Oh, just get married anyway. What matters is that you are together with the one you love and a piece of paper is a legal matter. The bonds of love should be the real ties. Be happy!
* Disclaimer * These are my opinions and not intended to be in discord with anyone's lifestyle. To each his or her own. He just said what many people were brought up to believe. But the fact that laws might be passed regarding this subject is more of a civil matter than a religious one. -
- perhaps Obama has to "say" that, in order not to give further ammo to the republicans in their smear campaigns ?.. just a thought..-
Probably a useless strategy, that. If he doesn't give them stuff to smear him with, they just make it up.
-
-
The truth will set you free. Funny how @MarkPogue believes a so-called 'bed mate' of Donnie but yet believes Donnie is lying. People will choose what they want to believe, I, on the other hand choose to stand on the unflinching but loving word of God and for that I have no apologies. I have faced more intense fire than a bunch of rabid hissicuffs from left wing bloggers. Again, I say with all firmness that homosexuality is wrong, but I am against any form of discriminatory laws against gays as I leave that to God to be the sole judge. After all, he is the creator, not us.
-
If god is the creator and the sole judge, then who are you to say what he created is wrong?
-
More mythological mishmash.
-
-
Politics at BC: www.blogcatalog.com/politics/discuss
-
nothing new here. he made the same clear in the debates. it is a position that i see as politically expediant and not thoughtful. it disappoints me. i don't think the position squares with other positions. having said that, i'm not about to throw obama out with the bubble bath water. he will select supreme court justices that will make sure future laws will not diminish equal pursuits and protections for all.
-
I voted "no" but meant "yes"
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
