Political Discussions

Political Discussions » General Discussion

Obama's Policies on Civil Rights

Posted by voodooKobra • 2/07/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: civil rights

Support Full Civil Unions and Federal Rights for LGBT Couples: President Obama supports full civil unions that give same-sex couples legal rights and privileges equal to those of married couples. Obama also believes we need to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions. These rights and benefits include the right to assist a loved one in times of emergency, the right to equal health insurance and other employment benefits, and property rights.

www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/civil_rights/

This should piss a lot of conservatives off.

User Comments

2/07/09

libertycast1

Well it's a shame they shouldn't want the government regulating their churchly matters. It's pandora's box. Government needs to stay out of marriage entirely they have no business being involved. It will only backfire eventually anyway.

[reply]
1. 2/07/09
  
  Anok
  
  Repealing acts and supporting equality is not regulating churchly matters.
  
  Marriage in it's legal form is a legal, not religious matter. Ergo the government has full authority to regulate it.
  
  Not one civil liberty has ever been won by popular vote. All liberties granted in the US has been granted through teh courts, and signed into law by the US government.
  
  Every.Single.One.
2. 2/07/09
  
  RenalFailure
  
  You mean the right for women to vote was not brought to us by Coca-Cola? That the right to protect against unlawful search and seizure was not sponsored by Snickers?
3. 2/07/09
  
  satijournal
  
  Government needs to stay out of marriage entirely they have no business being involved.
  
  That's right. The government shouldn't decide who can or can't get married.
4. 2/07/09
  
  libertycast1
  
  Really so it had nothing to do with the church before they started regulating it do to syphilis cases. Hmmmm. Glad I never learned that in publication, otherwise I would be wrong.
  
  And it's beyond who can and can't they have no reason being involved at all. Civil unions for tax and other related economic purposes; not social regulation unless it protects minors. Unless you are saying would should go with social regulation. Then let's give it a full 100%.
5. 2/07/09
  
  Anok
  
  Erm, no. Historically speaking the Church wanted nothing to do with officiating marriages - that didn't occur until pressure from royal families in the late middle ages.
  
  In the US there is a separation of church and state. The government hands out the licenses - and upholds the benefits. The church has nothing to do with it at all whatsoever, unless you choose to have a religious wedding.
  
  Otehr than that - churches cannot give out marriages licenses wihtout the state's stamp on it, or it is not valid. Churches cannot uphold the legalities and benefits of marriage in court. Churches cannot conduct divorces and legally divvy up the property and inheritences. Churches cannot decide child custody rights.
  
  Churches have NO legal bearing on marriage whatsoever.
  
  Marriage licenses are provided by the government.
2/10/09

libertycast1

holy cow I messed up before - publication should be public education.

Way too busy right now. I'll follow up on this later.

[reply]
1. 2/10/09
  
  voodooKobra
  
  Publication is somewhat of a portmanteau.