More on Gay Marriage

[Genius Gone Insane]

I think gay marriage should be legal in the USA. But I find it disturbing that the views on it have changed so suddenly.

And then you see weird gay rights shit going on all over the news. Seems like the President is using an iron fist to legalize gay marriage. That's my guess at least as to who is behind this recent push.

http://insidescoopsf.sfgate.com/blog/2013/03/29/southern-california-chick-fil-a-franchisee-shocks-the-world-by-supporting-gay-rights-with-free-meals/

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/singer-michelle-shocked-sits-canceled-show-18836722#.UVXH86OzNm4

I'm torn because I am a supporter of gay marriage here but I really don't like the fact that the country is getting forced into it. And I don't like that Michelle Shocked is being scapegoated to such an extreme degree. I think she's a lunatic and I am not a fan of her music but what the media has done to her is fucked up. But I guess no news is bad news so maybe she'll benefit in the end. But I think it's pretty shitty that she becomes this super bad guy just because she used a few bad words. She is like #1 most hated person in the bay area right now. Why? For speaking her mind. I love San Francisco but we are such hypocrites sometimes.

 

[vespiz]

It's a non-issue to me; this picture sums it up quite nicely.

 

[kass]

I'm torn because I am a supporter of gay marriage here but I really don't like the fact that the country is getting forced into it.

Don't feel bad about a tyranny of majority type of situation being subverted.

 

[RedDog]

I'm just really excited for Gay Divorce Court.

 

[egan.]

I think this is just a classic case of GGI not actually understanding the forces at work. Let's recount the things that help the gay marriage movement since 1996:

#1 internet activism -this can't be overstated. It turned passive supporters in to active voices.
#2 mainstream television and movies featuring fictional gay leads - it may seem trivial but these were the first gay individuals many Americans got to know.
#3 mainstream television featuring out gay hosts - See above, Americans got to know and generally like Ellen, Rossie, Anderson, the Queer Eye dudes etc
#4 A shrinking evangelical movement - the most organized and motivated opposition lost some political power
#5 a growing libertarian movement - Turned Republican die hards into allies
#6 a democratic president and senate
#7 Shift in support from organizations such as the NAACP - Again, turned opposing traditional Christians into Civil Rights alliances.
#8 States taking the lead in legalization forcing a national conversation and Supreme Court cases - brought things to a head
#9 logic

What we are seeing right now is the culmination of decades of activism coming to a head. It's only instantaneous if you stuck your head in the sand when DADT was passed and just woke up.

 

[colonel kurtz]

you know, i'm sure that if widespread polling was available in the 19th century, a similar graph would probably exist showing the proportions of the population who supported/opposed slavery. you won't find many people now who would admit to thinking it's a good idea...but plenty of folks were vehemently in favor of it back in the day.

the reason the gay rights movement is gaining so much headway as of late is because homosexuals are the last remaining group of people in this country who can be legally discriminated against for just being who they are, and they're getting sick of it - and rightfully so. i read an article just a few days ago about how it's still legally allowable to fire a person from their job in 41 states due to their sexual orientation. to think that the protections we grant our citizenry in regards to age, race, sex, national origin, religion, etc. aren't extended to a singular group of people is ludicrous. i find it an absolute disgrace that someone can be legally shit upon because of who they choose to spend their personal time with - and all real americans should be, as well.

 

[egan.]

I was thinking the same thing as regards the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

 

[JeffTD]

What the fuck are you even talking about GGI? Please explain to me how Obama is using "an iron fist to legalize gay marriage"? Do you not understand at all how the powers of the presidency work?

You literally do not understand or refuse to acknowledge fundamental principles of reality and society.

And of course that singer should be shunned and ridiculed - she's a shitty person.

At this point you're so insane that you can't even agree with things you morally support without inventing some kind of tin-foil haberdashery surrounding it.

 

[Genius Gone Insane]

I agree it would be interesting to see similar polls around the time of the abolition of slavery and the civil rights movement.

Incidentally, while all us left wingers were running around exclaming about how near we are to legalizing gay marriage, this happened:

"The US House of Representatives quietly passed a last-minute addition to the Agricultural Appropriations Bill for 2013 last week - including a provision protecting genetically modified seeds from litigation in the face of health risks."

http://rt.com/usa/monsanto-congress-silently-slips-830/

Ironically, Prop 37 in California had a similar last minute shift in its polling just weeks before the November vote.

Also, if it's not interesting to you then don't post and let the thread die on its own.

 

[egan.]

Maybe it was quiet to you but I got 10+ emails about the Monsanto addendum, my facebook is blown up with stuff about it and I emailed my congressmen before and after. ADD isn't sleight of hand.

OTOH you did just change the subject rather than answering Jeff's question of how exactly Obama was "ramming gay marriage down people's throats." Obviously he has slowly come around to public support but given the recent attention has to do with the Judicial and not the executive branch it's tough to see your logic.

 

[monoxide_child]

 

[Loren Littlejohn]

How can polls even work in this day and age anyway?

Who the fuck still has a home phone?

 

[monoxide_child]

watch the video
just watch the freaking video

 

[TheWinterSnow]

Rights and equality can't really be forced. That is why we have a republic, to keep the majority from imposing its rule on the minority. Just because the majority don't want gays to have equal rights doesn't mean that opinion is correct, nor does it mean an administration that changes the law for more equality against the opinion of the majority mean that law is being "forced" on anyone.

I see this though as a PR stunt by the Obozo administration to cover up or make up for the shit he has pulled recently or is about to pull. You know saving face to try to make himself look like a humanitarian. All the hardcore Obozo supporters will be using it as proof that he is the greatest president that ever lived like they are still doing with regards to Obozocare, while completely turning their heads to the fact that he allows for the drone strikes overseas that kill innocent women and children.

 

[colonel kurtz]

Rights and equality can't really be forced

see brown v. board of education 1954

also, i don't really see why people are even bringing obama's name into this issue

while i understand that yes, he recently stated he supports gay marriage, and has instructed the justice dept. to not defend the defense of marriage act because he feels it to be unconstitutional, the simple fact is that it was the supreme court's decision to hear the 2 cases related to same-sex marriage, and it will be the court and the court alone who determines the constitutionality of laws prohibiting such.

 

[egan.]

I see this though as a PR stunt by the Obozo administration to cover up or make up for the shit he has pulled recently or is about to pull. You know saving face to try to make himself look like a humanitarian. All the hardcore Obozo supporters will be using it as proof that he is the greatest president that ever lived like they are still doing with regards to Obozocare, while completely turning their heads to the fact that he allows for the drone strikes overseas that kill innocent women and children.

Can you explain how the Obama administration managed to time and force a Supreme Court review of a challenge to the 1996 DOMA act for a time which was (according to your logic) beneficial to the administration? They have zero authority over the SC docket. According to all logic applied by those who actually understand the system they simply didn't. At worst they voiced support late on a seemingly decided issue which is politics 101.
Perhaps you should read this article on how, why and who decided to address this issue and why it's happening now.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/30/u...on-same-sex-marriage.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

[Terminus]

It's a non-issue to me; this picture sums it up quite nicely.

Haha perfect

 

[Jind]

Seems like the President is using an iron fist to legalize gay marriage. That's my guess at least as to who is behind this recent push.

You are really oversimplifying a very nuanced stance the president has on gay marriage - he has asked for the Supreme Court to overrule DOMA as his administration deemed it unconstitutional for the federal government to deny benefits to couples recognized in states that do allow gay marriage.

Marriage has for the most part been a state sanctioned practice, it is licensed by individual states and not the federal government, but the federal government does provide over 1100 benefits to married couples and as such his view is that if a state recognizes a marriage it is unconstitutional for the federal government to distinguish between classes of individuals. To be clear this is not about making it mandatory in all states.

While I have no doubt that a portion of liberal legislators would like to see a nationwide requirement, that's not the stance the president has put forth.

These two cases this week have been brought by individual and not the government. While the DOMA case is about the constitutionality of a law that the legislative branch and then President Clinton put into law back in 1996, it was something that the current administrations opinion was unconstitutional and when the case was elevated to the Supreme Court, they simply stated they would not defend the law and it was then left to congress republicans to put up the fight and hire attorneys to defend it.

The Prop 8 case has reached the Supreme Court after a referendum about adding a constitutional amendment to California's constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman. It's only at the Supreme Court level because a US District Court overruled the California Supreme Courts decision stating it violated both the Due Process and Equal Rites amendments of the US constitution.

The likely outcome of both cases will be very narrowly worded decisions, unlikely to have a nation wide impact.

In Prop 8 they will most likely either dismiss the case on grounds of lack of "standing" - questions have been raised whether the defenders of Prop 8 have standing to bring the case to the SCOTUS as the proper defenders should be the California Governor, AG, and house - but they, similar to the DOMA case, have decided not to defend it. The result would be that Prop 8 would fall as the US District Court decision would stand and it would be deemed unconstitutional. It's also likely that the SCOTUS decision will be narrowly worded so the decision will only impact California.

The DOMA decisions, could very well fall along the same basis, but as it is a case where federal benefits are involved it will probably be struck down with caveats that marriage is a state issue that the only involvement at the federal level should be that the constitution guarantees equal rites to all - so if the granter of marriage certificates, the individual states that recognize gay marriages say a couple is married, it's unconstitutional to deny them federal benefits/recognition.

So to summarize my lengthy post - your wrong on your assumption that the president is pushing legalizing gay marriage as a mandatory requirement at the state level for all states and is doing so with an "iron fist".

By the way, President Obama has stated publicly that his personal belief is that marriage is defined as between one man and one woman, but regardless of that personal belief, he sees DOMA as unconstitutional as we are guaranteed equal protections under the law according to Fourteenth Amendment, which technically only applies to the states, but it's been read as being applicable to the federal government as part of the Fifth Amendment.

More than likely we will have the slow move of state by state recognition for a very long time, but as polling shows, with more and more young people accepting of gay marriage it's only a matter of time before we reach critical mass and it becomes a nationally accepted right.

 

[Jind]

Some people in this thread are really uninformed and have not taken the time to research/understand positions and facts before doing the old ASS U ME ing

 

[Genius Gone Insane]

Maybe it was quiet to you but I got 10+ emails about the Monsanto addendum, my facebook is blown up with stuff about it and I emailed my congressmen before and after. ADD isn't sleight of hand.

OTOH you did just change the subject rather than answering Jeff's question of how exactly Obama was "ramming gay marriage down people's throats." Obviously he has slowly come around to public support but given the recent attention has to do with the Judicial and not the executive branch it's tough to see your logic.

I had no idea about the addendum until i saw facebook today. I think it is great you contacted your congressman about it. I wish I had.

I didn't answer Jeff's question because I didn't understand it. I said I assume it's Obama behind this, I don't know for a fact. It is clear to me that someone is behind it. I would think it is Obama. Obviously if you look at that chart and don't think it is suspicious that 90 million people in the USA alone changed their mind on this fundamental topic in such a short time then there is no hope in me even defending my stance. Maybe all my friends and all the people I know are stubborn but I have not once had someone tell me "I used to be against same sex marriage but now I support it." Maybe I am a blind Californiacentric but if I haven't heard one person change their mind how am I supposed to believe that 1 out of every 3 people in this country have changed their minds?

Data and news is so easy to manipulate these days that it's hardly worth trusting anything. That chart was linked to the front page of the New York Times. Go look at where that data comes from. Half the polls in these surveys are from the major networks, ABC, CBS, NBC, and yes our honest friends at FOX. You know who owns these companies, and you know who answers to them.

If you put fake data on the front page of fake news sites you can sway people to calm down when their values are questioned. That is what I believe is happening. Whatever. I don't have data to support it. It just seems obvious to me. It happens in other industries, I don't see why it wouldn't happen here. It doesn't matter. The end result is good for our country.