This is getting really f**king old....now he’s using "incest and child marriage" as a rationale....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/12/obama-defends-antigay-def_n_214764.html

http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/obama-justice-department-defends-doma.html


Between you and me I’m getting sick of this crap

eh, his admin does not speak directly for obama.

But at the same time I saw this coming. He wants a second term, got gain a small portion of the religious rights vote.

"DOMA is good because it saves the feds money"

hmmm imo money should not be playing any sort of factor in this. In fact I don’t think money should be a primary factor in any decision the government makes, maybe that’s where we are going wrong, it’s all about the money instead of the people and the country.

Katie in the sky with diamonds wrote:
"DOMA is good because it saves the feds money"



hmmm imo money should not be playing any sort of factor in this. In fact I don’t think money should be a primary factor in any decision the government makes, maybe that’s where we are going wrong, it’s all about the money instead of the people and the country.

agreed!

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/16/opinion/16tue1.html

"The Obama administration, which came to office promising to protect gay rights but so far has not done much, actually struck a blow for the other side last week. It submitted a disturbing brief in support of the Defense of Marriage Act, which is the law that protects the right of states to not recognize same-sex marriages and denies same-sex married couples federal benefits. The administration needs a new direction on gay rights.

A gay couple married under California law is challenging the act in federal court. In its brief, the Justice Department argues that the couple lack legal standing to do so. It goes on to contend that even if they have standing, the case should be dismissed on the merits.

The brief insists it is reasonable for states to favor heterosexual marriages because they are the “traditional and universally recognized form of marriage.” In arguing that other states do not have to recognize same-sex marriages under the Constitution’s “full faith and credit” clause, the Justice Department cites decades-old cases ruling that states do not have to recognize marriages between cousins or an uncle and a niece.

These are comparisons that understandably rankle many gay people. In a letter to President Obama on Monday, Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights organization, said, “I cannot overstate the pain that we feel as human beings and as families when we read an argument, presented in federal court, implying that our own marriages have no more constitutional standing than incestuous ones.”

The brief also maintains that the Defense of Marriage Act represents a “cautious policy of federal neutrality” — an odd assertion since the law clearly discriminates against gay couples. Under the act, same-sex married couples who pay their taxes are ineligible for the sort of federal benefits — such as Social Security survivors’ payments and joint tax returns — that heterosexual married couples receive.

In the presidential campaign, President Obama declared that he would work to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act. Now, the administration appears to be defending it out of a sense of obligation to support a validly enacted Congressional law. There is a strong presumption that the Justice Department will defend federal laws, but it is not an inviolable rule.

If the administration does feel compelled to defend the act, it should do so in a less hurtful way. It could have crafted its legal arguments in general terms, as a simple description of where it believes the law now stands. There was no need to resort to specious arguments and inflammatory language to impugn same-sex marriage as an institution.

The best approach of all would have been to make clear, even as it defends the law in court, that it is fighting for gay rights. It should work to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell, ” the law that bans gay men and lesbians in the military from being open about their sexuality. It should push hard for a federal law banning employment discrimination. It should also work to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act in Congress.

The administration has had its hands full with the financial crisis, health care, Guantánamo Bay and other pressing matters. In times like these, issues like repealing the marriage act can seem like a distraction — or a political liability. But busy calendars and political expediency are no excuse for making one group of Americans wait any longer for equal rights."

thus my anger at Obama right now

I heard on the news this morning that obama is extending benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees


news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090617/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_gay_benefits

steph uhhh neeeee ™ wrote:
I heard on the news this morning that obama is extending benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees





news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090617/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_gay_benefits

I saw that too. At least its something.

Angel of the night wrote:

steph uhhh neeeee ™ wrote:

I heard on the news this morning that obama is extending benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees








news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090617/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_gay_benefits

I saw that too. At least its something.

It’s a slap in the face is what it is...

Let’s just please everybody!...something is better than nothing...and please check his and the attorney generals recent statements...


I personally have no problem with same sex relationships..but I kind of fell you should let the church have the word marriage and go for the rights...cause what’s in a word...

By matter of fact…I’m still a nigger/coon and ignorant to some people and always will be...and you will always be gay/fagot and against nature...get over it and get the rights forget the word...

“Civil unions” actually sounds better...and both words are pointless since everyone ends up divorced any way...

Blu Child wrote:
Let’s just please everybody!...something is better than nothing...and please check his and the attorney generals recent statements...





I personally have no problem with same sex relationships..but I kind of fell you should let the church have the word marriage and go for the rights...cause what’s in a word...



By matter of fact…I’m still a nigger/coon and ignorant to some people and always will be...and you will always be gay/fagot and against nature...get over it and get the rights forget the word...



“Civil unions” actually sounds better...and both words are pointless since everyone ends up divorced any way...

Considering we have socialized other essential needs, such as the police force, army(duh), education(even on the college level there is government programs to help pay your way through college rather than relying on the free market), I can’t see how Medical care isn’t socialized. It should be a good thing to give, a healthy workforce is a efficient workforce right? Plus, all other western nations have some form of a National health system, heck we provide one for Iraq and Afghanistan with the war money.
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.gadling.com/media/2007/07/healthcareworldbig.jpg

Reguardless of that, I am glad there will be some form of healthcare reform, but relying on the freemarket just because we’ve always done it isn’t a wise idea, some things need to change for the betterment of the future.

wait, fuck wrong thread.

Blu Child wrote:
Let’s just please everybody!...something is better than nothing...and please check his and the attorney generals recent statements...





I personally have no problem with same sex relationships..but I kind of fell you should let the church have the word marriage and go for the rights...cause what’s in a word...



By matter of fact…I’m still a nigger/coon and ignorant to some people and always will be...and you will always be gay/fagot and against nature...get over it and get the rights forget the word...



“Civil unions” actually sounds better...and both words are pointless since everyone ends up divorced any way...

How about we make a new word, gaymarriage. same thing as marriage but with gay people, but straight people can keep the original word. fair trade off?

LOL ...sure why the hell not!...and I though gay people were all about being original...LOL

Blu Child wrote:
Let’s just please everybody!...something is better than nothing...and please check his and the attorney generals recent statements...





I personally have no problem with same sex relationships..but I kind of fell you should let the church have the word marriage and go for the rights...cause what’s in a word...



By matter of fact…I’m still a nigger/coon and ignorant to some people and always will be...and you will always be gay/fagot and against nature...get over it and get the rights forget the word...



“Civil unions” actually sounds better...and both words are pointless since everyone ends up divorced any way...

I’m all for civil unions, as long as straight couples get them too.

either marriage for everybody or civil unions for everybody

no separate but equal stuff

Hi Tack "Lets Dance"