Obama '08?

It just serves to illustrate the hypocrisy of the Obama supporters who eviscerated Bushie for "talking aout God" and getting his policies from the Bible. Will be listening to their contortions regularly soon, I suppose.

How would a dyed in the wool Obama supporter answer to that?

Additionally, Obama seems to be telling society what marriage is for...? Procreation? Sounds a little Big Brotherish, eh? Sounds fence straddlish, eh? Sounds like the same fundamentalist, paternalist, invasive crap the left hates the right for.

Very Happy

0 Replies

The way I'd answer that is that, in order to find this kind of pronouncement about his struggles of conscience based on his Christian faith, one would have to specifically find the chapter on "Faith" in his book, and turn to page 222. The complaint I have about some, like Bush (and Harold Ford, so that this doesn't have to be just another partisan firefight) is that one doesn't have to conduct such a search with them - they parade it out at the drop of a hat, and it looks and sounds manufactured.

I realize that's sort of a judgement call. But I don't guess Obama was going to lose your support because of this, was he Lash? Very Happy

0 Replies

Everyone has the same chance to earn my support out of the gate.

It goes into the equation.

Very Happy

0 Replies

Read some of where he stands on stuff, yet?

0 Replies

Yes. I've heard a few of his speeches and read some interviews.

The main attraction for me to vote Democrat would be to support a crusader for civil rights--and Obama fails there. Not a definite no--but highly unlikely. May as well vote for a Conservative re civil rights.

Why do you ask?

Is your mind made up?

<silly smirk>

I know about his biography. It's just so hypocritical (to me) to leave gay people out of what he's been doing for other people.

0 Replies

If you think that there is any conservative who can match Obama in his committment to work for the disenfranchised (civil rights, in other words), I respectfully disagree.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Someone asked about Obama and gay marriage. I've been working 11-12 hour days, and haven't had much motivation to look, until now...

From The Audacity of Hope, pg 222:

I believe that American society can choose to carve out a special place for the union of a man and a womanas the unit of child rearing most common to every culture. I am not willing to have the state deny American citizens in a civil union that confers equivalent rights on such basic matters as hospital visitation or health insurance coverage simply because the people they love are the same sex - nor am I willing to accept a reading of the Bible that considers an obscure line in romans to be more defining of Christianity than the sermon on the Mount.

[...]

The above passages illustrate some of what I like about the man. He isn't rigid, but he is strong in the convictions he has taken to heart. That he doesn't claim to have the 'be all and end al' answers on such deeply serious issues as gay marriage or abortion rights doesn't condemn him in my eyes. I'd rather someone took a principled stand and was open about all of the reasoning behind that stand - including the doubts.

I suspect that's because you agree with the substance of what he says. Others disagree with it -- both on the right and on the left -- and they would have good reason to disagree with such lack of rigor about basic principles. To see what I mean, consider the same passage with "homosexuality" replaced with (1) a problem that seems similar to liberals and (2) a problem that seems similar to conservatives.

"I believe that American society can choose to carve out a special place for a union of a man and a woman of the same race. I am not willing to have the state deny American citizens in a civil union that confers equivalent rights on such basic rmatters as jospital visitation or health insurance coverage simply because the people they love are of a different race...."
"I believe that American society can choose to carve out a special place for the union of a man and a woman outside of his family. I am not willing to have the state deny American citizens in a civil union that confers equivalent rights on such basic matters as hospital visitation or health insurance coverage simply because the people they love are their siblings, chlidren, or parents...."

Do you still like the lack of rigor in these mutated quotes? If not, I submit to you that you like it in the case of homosexuality because it's not a big deal for you anyway, and because you think it doesn't really touch fundamental rights (as in the case of watering down miscegenation laws instead of abolishing them), or (I guess) important matters (as in the case of legalizing incest).

0 Replies

Very well said, Thomas-- Especially the nod to my pet project of reviving the Conservative tenet: Dad and Daughter Lovin.

<denotes irritation>

Snood--

I'll have to stop using hyperbole and try satire. I hate that he excludes a segment of society from civil rights. But, we both know our views on this. I'll just address it when it comes up. Don't mean to harp on it. It's just so glaring to me.

Anyway, thank you for the measured reply.

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

Very well said, Thomas-- Especially the nod to my pet project of reviving the Conservative tenet: Dad and Daughter Lovin.

<denotes>

Snood--

I'll have to stop using hyperbole and try satire. I hate that he excludes a segment of society from civil rights. But, we both know our views on this. I'll just address it when it comes up. Don't mean to harp on it. It's just so glaring to me.

Anyway, thank you for the measured reply.

Pretty much what I said about 4 pages back when I asked the original question and JPB provided the same quote from the book. My reaction was disappointment and compared his non-stance with his stance on affirmative actions.

It has made me want to re-examine some of his other stances more carefully.

0 Replies

I think a very large number of people of good conscience are still torn on the issue of gay marriage.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

I think a very large number of people of good conscience are still torn on the issue of gay marriage.

I understand. Some well-meaning people still think blacks and whites need to socialize and go to school separately.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

If not, I submit to you that you like it in the case of homosexuality because it's not a big deal for you anyway, and because you think it doesn't really touch fundamental rights (as in the case of watering down miscegenation laws instead of abolishing them), or (I guess) important matters (as in the case of legalizing incest).

Some part of the sentence vanished somehow. In the last line it must read: "important matters of public health".

0 Replies

To reiterate what I've said before, I wish Obama supported gay marriage. It's one of the very few areas where I disagree with him. But realistically, in terms of his chances at getting elected, this is probably a sum benefit rather than a sum loss. Someone who agreed with every lefty opinion I have would have very little chance of making it to the White House.

And I hold out far more hope that he could be convinced that gay men and women have as much right to get married as straight men and women once he's actually in office (or, for that matter, in the two years before the election) than most politicians who are currently anti-gay-marriage.

I do somewhat agree with snood's point, though probably not in the way he'd expect. I think that the time is important here. I DO think that there were people of good conscience who were uneasy about the idea of black people marrying white people right when legislation was first striking down old taboos. I don't think that means they were right -- I think they were as wrong as Obama is about this one. But it takes a lot to shake off old ways of thinking, even if one's heart is basically in the right place. And Obama is saying he is for civil unions, which is certainly more enlightened than saying that homosexuality is wrong, or that gay men and lesbians shouldn't have their lifestyle officially condoned in any way, etc. I see room for movement there -- hopefully right along with the rest of the country.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

To reiterate what I've said before, I wish Obama supported gay marriage. It's one of the very few areas where I disagree with him. But realistically, in terms of his chances at getting elected, this is probably a sum benefit rather than a sum loss. Someone who agreed with every lefty opinion I have would have very little chance of making it to the White House.

I agree. But as I understood Snood, he liked the stand Obama took in its own right. Also, I presume he bumped his response because he wanted a reaction to it. That's why I explained to him why I don't like Obama's stand in its own right. (For the record, I agree with those conservatives who don't see a real distinction between gay, polygamous and incestuous relations, and think they should all receive legal recognition. But that's probably an argument for a different thread.)

0 Replies

Yeah, the gay marriage thing could easily become a topic-obscuring tangent -- so maybe that in and of itself (as in, whether Obama SHOULD be for or against marriage rather than whether he IS) should go on a new thread.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Yeah, the gay marriage thing could easily become a topic-obscuring tangent -- so maybe that in and of itself (as in, whether Obama SHOULD be for or against marriage rather than whether he IS) should go on a new thread.

Oh, I do think Obama is pro-marriage. I hear he openly practices it himself.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Yeah, the gay marriage thing could easily become a topic-obscuring tangent -- so maybe that in and of itself (as in, whether Obama SHOULD be for or against marriage rather than whether he IS) should go on a new thread.

Probably.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

...

I do somewhat agree with snood's point, though probably not in the way he'd expect. I think that the time is important here. I DO think that there were people of good conscience who were uneasy about the idea of black people marrying white people right when legislation was first striking down old taboos. I don't think that means they were right -- I think they were as wrong as Obama is about this one. But it takes a lot to shake off old ways of thinking, even if one's heart is basically in the right place. And Obama is saying he is for civil unions, which is certainly more enlightened than saying that homosexuality is wrong, or that gay men and lesbians shouldn't have their lifestyle officially condoned in any way, etc. I see room for movement there -- hopefully right along with the rest of the country.

To equate gay marriage to racial prejudice is kind of weird, and I would think an insult to those that have suffered from racial prejudice.

0 Replies

I think Sozobe is right that the issue of 'pro/con gay marriage' has too much thread-busting potential, and that if anyone has a strong desire to hash it out, another thread is probably a good idea.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know