May 15, 2008
Categories: Barack Obama

Marriage statements

Obama's the first one out with a statement on the California ruling striking down the state's gay-marriage ban.

I'll add the others as they come in.

McCain: “John McCain supports the right of the people of California to recognize marriage as a unique institution sanctioning the union between a man and a woman, just as he did in his home state of Arizona. John McCain doesn’t believe judges should be making these decisions.”

UPDATE: JMart wisely notes: Because Obama is not where the far left wants him to be (marriage) and McCain not where the far right wants him to be (a federal ban), this is not something either will probably make front and center.

UPDATE: Clinton: "Hillary Clinton believes that gay and lesbian couples in committed relationships should have the same rights and responsibilities as all Americans and believes that civil unions are the best way to achieve this goal. As President, Hillary Clinton will work to ensure that same sex couples have access to these rights and responsibilities at the federal level. She has said and continues to believe that the issue of marriage should be left to the states."

Comments

I agree and couldn't have said it better.

Posted By: HM | May 15, 2008 at 05:28 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

I'm baffled by this "marriage law" movement. Although I am in a hetrosexual marriage, I don't understand why people care who their neighbors go to bed with, provided it is consensual (and age-appropriate, of course). If you want to be gay, go for it...doesn't affect me any as long as you uphold the law and are an asset to society. Real freedom is the ability to make a choice about who you want to spend your life with...if that is someone of the same sex, why should I care?? Can someone explain to me why we even spend time arguing about this?

Posted By: Adriana | May 15, 2008 at 05:29 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Not really helpful to him.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:32 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

We spend time arguing about it because the religious right holds a fairly firm grip on the politics of this country, and they feel the need to influence laws in favor of their own morality... and impose their morality on others.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:35 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

That's a pretty tepid statement. Just "respects" the opinion... "continue to fight for civil unions" when the Court's decision said that gay couples should receive "marriages" and that "civil unions" weren't enough... this is pretty wishy-washy on Obama's part.

Posted By: dt | May 15, 2008 at 05:39 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

This man is the hedge of all hedgers. He basically said nothing of substance. He is essentially trying to talk out of both sides of his mouth: If you're in Calif I support your support of gay marriage. If you're in West Virginia, I support you banning it. He's trying to take both sides and his accolites will think this is somehow "well said". Geez, standards people.

Posted By: pacificaharry | May 15, 2008 at 05:39 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Another good reason to NOT vote Obama...

Posted By: Clay | May 15, 2008 at 05:40 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

****Although I am in a hetrosexual marriage, I don't understand why people care who their neighbors go to bed with, provided it is consensual (and age-appropriate, of course). If you want to be gay, go for it...**** The marriage law does not prohibit gay from being gay. I personally don't care either who do they go in bed with either, but there are some rules here which we know from the day when Adam and Eva have been born as first human beings on this planet. It was Adam and Eva and not Adam and Josh. There are no legal, no historical and definately no moral grounds to allow gay to marry and enjoy the same statuis as heterosexually couples. Their only argument is that "because they love each other". They want children now too. We have come in some countries into absurd situation. For instance Spain: a gay, lesbian couple and even a single womancan adopt kids, but a single man can't. ???

Posted By: Frederik | May 15, 2008 at 05:40 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

So those that support this non committal statement by Obama, also agree with a states right to prohibit abortion?

Posted By: pacificaharry | May 15, 2008 at 05:40 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

be sure to call the flip flop when he comes out.

Posted By: Important point | May 15, 2008 at 05:42 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

This will hurt him in the GE. It will also hurt him among Reagan Dems. Makes him look as liberal as he is.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:42 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

California DID make the decision -- the PEOPLE decided. It took 4 fascists wearing black robes to destroy the Will of the People.

Posted By: Nobama | May 15, 2008 at 05:45 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

pacificaharry: I am sure the Obamanians will give you one of their standard typical Obamanian responses: a.) You are racist b.) Maybe c.) You cling to guns and religion d.) God damn you e.) I support everything, anywhere, everybody. f.) I have no opinion on this subject.

Posted By: Frederik | May 15, 2008 at 05:46 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Typical Obama weasel statement. Does he support gay marriage or not? Or should Michelle first loan him back his testicles so he can answer?

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:46 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

4 justices on the supreme court just overruled the vote of the overwhelming majority of California citizens. Welcome to Nazi Germany.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:46 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

I don't understand either (as a hetrosexual) why people care who sleeps with who? That's the problem with the repugs they care about the wrong things. They are against Abortion but it's OK to kill adults with the death penalty, they say they appose gay marriage but instead they are the party with all the closest gays or should I say men's room gays

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:47 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Why do liberals/gays hate marriage so much that they seem obsessed with destroying it?

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:47 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

California already had civil unions that gave gays every single right that married people had. This decision is simply a hateful attack on thousands-year-old institution. It was unnecessary and unjustified.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:49 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Using the Court's "logic", it should be legal for a father to marry his daughter, or his son, or for that matter, both.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:50 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Not an issue some in this country are comfortable with but tolerance is dictated in our constitution and we must respect that. That people can be so threatened by who someone falls in love with or chooses to be with is beyond me. Obama 08!

Posted By: Jungleboy | May 15, 2008 at 05:51 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

How is this not "politics as usual" from Obama? He's hedging and walking the line...hardly what I'd call his new holier than thou politics. Obama is not who he says he is.

Posted By: Lezident | May 15, 2008 at 05:51 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

*****Does he support gay marriage or not? Or should Michelle first loan him back his testicles so he can answer?******* Correction: one testicle. :)

Posted By: Frederik | May 15, 2008 at 05:51 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

So the MSM should ask Obama (I know that's a stretch) if he is in fact for states rights? If so, he would pull in a lot of Reagan Dems and Ind., but it appears Obama is for states rights only when those rights fit into his liberal orthodoxy. Would it be asking too much then for the MSM also to ask him about states rights for abortion?

Posted By: pacificaharry | May 15, 2008 at 05:51 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

McCain will take a while, he's having a few senior moments today

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:51 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

How terrifying that four tyrannical facists on the court can so arrogantly pervert a 10,000 year social institution.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:52 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Only repugs would equate giving people more civil liberties with Nazi Germany....That is what I call irony....

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:52 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

pacificharry: That is a poor analogy. There has been no case decision similar to Roe v. Wade regarding gay marriage. It took years of organizing and legal battles for Roe to get its day in court. Gay marriage advocates are in the beginning stages of a similar battle.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:52 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

That is a non-statement on Obama's part and shows he is willing to keep his tricycle in the middle of the road in order to appear to be all things to all people. Like his slogans: they mean what you want them to me. Not showing any leadership.

Posted By: Tricycle | May 15, 2008 at 05:52 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Obama has stated many times he supports civil unions for same-as-marriage rights under the law, he personally does not support same sex marriage and states should decide.

Posted By: Brian | May 15, 2008 at 05:53 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Marriage versus civil union - I think the destinction here is the difference between a religious definition of marriage and the legal definition. There is a distinction - I don't think most gay couples would care what you call it - although I would say that the name of what you call it shouldn't be this big of a deal. Obama 08!

Posted By: Jungleboy | May 15, 2008 at 05:54 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Marriage versus civil union - I think the destinction here is the difference between a religious definition of marriage and the legal definition. There is a distinction - I don't think most gay couples would care what you call it - although I would say that the name of what you call it shouldn't be this big of a deal. Obama 08!

Posted By: Jungleboy | May 15, 2008 at 05:54 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

"why people care who sleeps with who?" - - - Stop chugging the bong water, moron. This isn't about who's sleeping with whom, it's about marriage. Sheesh, go back to your basement computer and tell your mom you need a clean pair of underwear.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:54 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

OH MY GOD JEEBUS THE GAY PEOPLE WILL HAVE THE WEDDINGS! QUICK ATTACK THE SECRET MUSLIMS IN IRAN!

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:56 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

They are already working on an initiative for a constitutional amendment to reverse the decision of the court and to reflect the vote of the people of California decided by votes. This would bring out Reps in droves in November making the pro-McCain turnout stronger than it may have otherwise been. In a strange way the court may have just done McCain a very big favor.

Posted By: Seatalker | May 15, 2008 at 05:56 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Who is the dumb ass equating a woman's right to choose with adults choosing who they marry?

Posted By: HM | May 15, 2008 at 05:58 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

California voted overwhelmingly in favor of defining marriage as between a man and a woman. So, does weasel Obama condemn the four fascists on the supreme court who just reversed the will of the people?

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 05:58 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

There is no constitutional right to marry "whoever you want". Otherwise it'd be legal to marry siblings, parents, children, etc. This isn't about "rights", it's about gays seeking to destroy an institution that they hate.

Posted By: Trainer | May 15, 2008 at 05:59 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

OBAMA THE WIMP. Talk about a milk toast, tap-dance answer to an important social issue.

Posted By: Hobama | May 15, 2008 at 06:01 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Republicians are going to get CREAMED come November, all over the country LOL LOL

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 06:01 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Thanks, Barry, for taking such a brave, firm, unequivocal stand for human rights. As lesbians who have always been committed Democrats, my wife and I will NOT be mailing in our absentee ballots from CANADA, where we enjoy the freedom to be MARRIED and not just "united civilly." You are a bitter disappointment.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 06:01 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Obama's statement is totally consistent with his stand on this issue. I don't think he's trying to weasel out of anything. He reiterated his support for full civil unions. He stops short of marriage because he thinks that it has religious implications. But he also understands that same-sex families should get equal rights under the law. But also stated that he is open to states (not voters) deciding if marriage is lawful under their respective state constitutions. This is a very controversial issue, and I applaud him for being vocal about this issue and taking a consistent and positive stand. Personally, I think the government should do away with marriage all together and only offer civil unions to everyone, straight or gay. That way there will be a full separation of church and state. Then if people want to get "married," then they can go to their church and have that done. I think this is the most sensible solution to this issue.

Posted By: Henry V | May 15, 2008 at 06:01 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA) sent a memo to the Republican House leadership explaining his party's prospects in November noting "the political atmosphere facing House Republicans this November is the worst since Watergate and is far more toxic than the fall of 2006 when we lost thirty seats."

"The loss of three straight special elections, in once solidly Republican districts cannot be explained simply by 'bad candidates', or by being out-organized. They are canaries in the coal mine, warning of far greater losses in the fall, if steps are not taken to remedy the current climate."

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 06:02 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA) sent a memo to the Republican House leadership explaining his party's prospects in November noting "the political atmosphere facing House Republicans this November is the worst since Watergate and is far more toxic than the fall of 2006 when we lost thirty seats."

"The loss of three straight special elections, in once solidly Republican districts cannot be explained simply by 'bad candidates', or by being out-organized. They are canaries in the coal mine, warning of far greater losses in the fall, if steps are not taken to remedy the current climate."

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 06:02 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

I do have one major concern. Isn't this going to take a huge number of ugly women and cute men out of circulation?

Posted By: Seatalker | May 15, 2008 at 06:04 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

ananymous responder: This is not a poor analogy. The question remains if Obama is for states rights or not? You can't be for states rights when it suits you and against it when it doesn't. Yes, repubs can be hypocritical on this as well but I think from a Prez candidate standpoint, Obama is just playing his usual hedgehog strategy. Does he also support states rights to determine if they want to drill off thier coast (ANWR)? Abortion? Etc?

Posted By: pacificaharry | May 15, 2008 at 06:04 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

There is no such thing as gay marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman. That is like calling a Television a Radio.

Posted By: I love Hillary | May 15, 2008 at 06:04 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

For those who think homosexuality is something new I would urge them to look at the ANCIENT Greeks and even Romans - homosexuality was not looked at quite the same way as the Christians did some years later. And for those who think Adam and Eve are literal - you are mistaken - it is a myth/fable discussing, yes our origins and directives but not a historical account of the first human couple and a talking snake. Love is love. Something some fundamentalist Christians at times I feel forget as part of their doctrine. Hmm..gonna have to blog about this... Obama 08!

Posted By: Jungleboy | May 15, 2008 at 06:06 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

sorry - but equal rights under the law should translate into marriage - not civil unions. imagine stripping hets of the right to marry and giving them civil unions...

Posted By: dems are hypocrites on s-s-m | May 15, 2008 at 06:07 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

First things first, I am straight. But, what's your problem with people who have a different sexual orientation ? If they are getting married, are they taking your money ?. These are the same rednecks and hillbillies who voted in W.Virginia, who don't have enough bread to eat, but would vote for Hillary. As we all know, Hillary can't even manage her campaign debt, imagine what she would do to U.S economy.

Posted By: Give me a Break | May 15, 2008 at 06:07 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Its actually a remarkable strong answer considering the question.

Posted By: Pete | May 15, 2008 at 06:08 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Obama Talks All Things LGBT with The Advocate
http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid53285.asp
------
Senator Obama: Being gay or lesbian is not a choice
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/vickilynne/gGBTGv

Keyes-Obama debate 2 (Homosexuality)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BT7qhGvykiQ&feature=related

Keyes-Obama debate 3 (Religion and Gay marriage)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG5u04Gbg0A

video of the LOGO Gay and Lesbian 2008 Democratic Presidential forum which aired on 8/9/07
http://www.youdecide2008.com/video/logo-visible-vote-08-democratic-presidential-forum/

Posted By: Marw | May 15, 2008 at 06:10 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

And for those homosexuals who are angry that it's not called Marriage - I would ask you why you want to be married? But more to the point, there are many hetereosexual couples who are NOT married but live as man and wife - what about their rights? In other words -the concept of marriage, as a traditional form, is outdated and should be more about the style/expression of your commitment, not the commitment itself. It's like the wedding ring - it's a symbol but the ring itself is not love or marriage. But for that lesbian lady from Canada - plese be patient. You expect too much too quickly - we as humans had to overcome so many other levels/styles of bigotry - patience. After all it was fifteen years ago that a show like Queer Eye or an entertainer like Ellen would have been impossible and/or banned by most. We have come a LONG way. Obama 08!

Posted By: Jungleboy | May 15, 2008 at 06:10 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Talk about saying nothing. And this guys wants to be President. This has not been a good Obama day.

Posted By: m | May 15, 2008 at 06:11 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Can't wait to hear Hilary's statement if/when it comes out. She has the same basic stance as Obama. If she comes out with an extremely pandering statement then you know that she is still trying to win the nom, is she comes out with an equally ambiguous statement, then it's over for her campaign

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 06:11 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

THE REAL MCCAIN

Posted By: Marw | May 15, 2008 at 06:11 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

imagine leaving "abortion" to the states. states regulate medical care and criminal law, so let them decide what to do with abortion, just like marriage. lol. you are either for equal protection or not. if so, then it is a federal issue. but clinton will say the same thing.

Posted By: state's issue? | May 15, 2008 at 06:13 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

And a general statement - everything is different now - old ideas and assumptions are just that - old the game has changed for us all So talking states rights or not, conservative or liberal, democrat or republican - I'd say what adjust your thinking, adapt or you will be left behind (and not in Kirk Cameron's way....) Obama 08!

Posted By: Jungleboy | May 15, 2008 at 06:14 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

With so many economic and social pressures on marriage, why the focus on one issue that doesn't have any sound theoretical basis for threatening marriage? Americans with alternative sexuality must at least be able to form civil unions with the same rights as marriage. The Christian fundamentalists seem to be really touchy about the word "marriage", but I doubt that many gays and lesbians are nearly as hung up on the terminology. I'm straight, but if this ridiculous issue is still around when I find the women I want to spend the rest of my life with, I'll consider a civil union. If so many Americans' idea of marriage is so backwards, then perhaps it's not for me.

Posted By: butters | May 15, 2008 at 06:15 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

What a hypocrite. Barry himself is married to a dude--a 6' tall, REALLY ugly drag queen with a bad Jackie-O-wanna-be flip-do.... oh wait, that's a woman? I could have sworn she wears those giant pearls to cover up that Adam's apple.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 06:16 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

If Manning is right at ATLAH Worldwide, now the "Mac Daddy" Barak and J. Wright can get married in Calli...

Posted By: T-Bob | May 15, 2008 at 06:18 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

I've been married over 40 years, believe me, the gays didn't get such a great deal.

Posted By: Seatalker | May 15, 2008 at 06:20 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

This is bad news for Obama. I bet he'd rather talk about anything than gay rights. But, the left wing of the party hears "hope" and "change" and thinks these are code words for hijacking the Democratic party away from retirees in Florida and the working man in Ohio to their radical left point of view. I'm a Democrat... and I'm worried.

Posted By: Victor | May 15, 2008 at 06:21 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Jungleboy (?!?!) asks: "And for those homosexuals who are angry that it's not called Marriage - I would ask you why you want to be married?" I married my wife because it constituted the most sacred expression of my love and commitment to her, just like my twin brother made when he married his. The fact that I am a woman who married a woman does not make our love less sacred. As long as one's church/faith tradition recognizes same-sex marriage as a legitimate sacrament, what right does the government have to interfere?

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 06:24 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

This isn't wishy-washy. He clearly states his opinion on equal rights under the law, and then his belief that this is under the states' purview. Basically, he believes that the federal Constitution mandates equal rights, but doesn't mandate that the states call it marriage. I agree completely.

Posted By: NJdem | May 15, 2008 at 06:27 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

To all you that say marriage is an established institution. Let's mention other institutions proclaimed by God and his Bible: Slavery, misogyny, child labor, genocide, genital mutilations, incest, scorched earth warfare, drinking blood of the enemy and a host of other sadistic practices. All with the stamp of approval of Jehova. Horray for the BIBLE!

Posted By: bentrider1957 | May 15, 2008 at 06:29 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

So, to all the people calling the judges "fascist:" 1) 6 of the 7 CA Supreme Court judges are Republican appointed. 2) They interpreted the California Constitution and court precedent to make their decision. 3) A popular referendum cannot violate the CA Constitution any more than a law passed by the legislature can. 4) If you have not read the decision, digested all arguments, precedents and conclusions, please do not call the decision incorrect as a matter of law. More (intelligent) discussion can be found here: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/05/15/california/

Posted By: Alex | May 15, 2008 at 06:29 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

A marriage is made by joining two DIFFERENT things together. Two things that are the same are not a marriage. I don't care what you do but please don't call it marriage. The California court made a really bad desicion.

Posted By: SA | May 15, 2008 at 06:33 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

live and let live, love and let love

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 06:35 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Obama's defense against the gay marriage ban makes me wonder whether some of those rumors about Obama are true.

Posted By: Ronald | May 15, 2008 at 06:38 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

When you consider Obama's response please keep in mind that a similar judgment came down in Mass during Kerry's campaign. The Republicans beat him over the head with it. Obama is fighting a President who uses a speech to the Knesset to condemn his political rival. Obama will be able to achieve nothing if he is not elected. The voters of Appalachia are still suspicious of his "elitist" stature and "bitter" comments. If he came out and welcomed gay marriage he would lose any hope of occupying the White House. And yes, he must win in November, if he doesn't John McCain will push for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. You are very unlikely to see a serious Presidential candidate publicly favor gay marriage. I am sorry about that because I personally celebrate the CA court decision, but we have to recognize reality. Unless we are George Bush.

Posted By: Susan from 29 | May 15, 2008 at 06:38 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Thats because he is a closet homo like Rev.Manning said.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 06:38 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

For all of you here who are angry because the court ruled against "the majority," please re-read your Constitution. If we always let the majority rule, I might still be a slave, I certainly wouldn't be able to vote, and I wouldn't have been allowed to go to an integrated school. And all my friends in interracial relationships would be in prison. In short, the Founding Fathers were very suspicious of "mob rule," partly because it is usually based on emotion, fear and perceived superiority... Thus, the judiciary branch--not always right, but hey, I certainly don't want "the majority" determining who has basic rights...I want reasoned debate on the Constitution, not the Bible.

Posted By: afrographia | May 15, 2008 at 06:46 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

pacificaharry -- I feel it's not fair of you to compare marriage equality to abortion rights and here's the reason why: a) The fight for abortion rights is a fight for reproductive freedom and personal control over your own body (Color Blue: Freedom) b) The fight for civil unions, is a fight for equality before the law. (Color White; Equality) c) The fight for the *name* of "marriage" is a fight for social acceptance. (Color Red: Solidarity) I feel the federal government is wiser to interfere more in state matters when it seeks to protect its citizens' Freedom (as in abortion rights) and much MUCH less when it seeks to promote Solidarity. And not from some mere principle of mine -- i just feel it works better that way in the long term. As such, all in all I support Obama's positions -- the states must decide individually, but the federal government must grant the full set of benefits. I'm not a big fanatic about it though, and I wouldn't mind terribly if marriage equality enforced from above. I just think it might work less well in the long term.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 06:47 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

above comment by me.

Posted By: Aris Katsaris | May 15, 2008 at 06:50 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

"Not an issue some in this country are comfortable with but tolerance is dictated in our constitution and we must respect that." --Jungleboy

The people who actually wrote the Constitution appear to have had a different opinion when it came to the frolicsome fairies. They made homosexuality against the law, and it is was usually punishable by death. It is true that the liberal Jefferson thought such a penalty too harsh. He argued in favor of castrating the buggers -- "gelding the lilies," so to speak.

Posted By: Farmer Bob | May 15, 2008 at 06:50 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

I see by some of the posts that bigots, racists and homophobes always rally and unite in the name of love and god.

Posted By: carmen | May 15, 2008 at 06:53 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

I'm pro-gay marriage but recognize the country isn't there yet--though as it becomes legal in a few states, and the worst fears of opponents are realized when it doesn't make a big difference that some gay couples are now married gay couples, the country will move that way. I'm okay with any position that aims at expanding the legal protections of marriage to gay couples, call it marriage or civil union.

Posted By: Deborah | May 15, 2008 at 06:54 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

pacificaharry - before you get too excited on your Obama-bashing theme. The night before Super Tuesday, Hillary Clinton had a mega town hall and a gay man from AZ asked her, on TV, whether she could interfere and grant him rights to get married were she Prez. What did she say? We live in a Federal Republic and marriage is something states decide on. To me that's a different way of saying different things may happen in Cali and South Dakota.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 06:55 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Well said Senator Obama. This is the Dems chance to rub the extreme right wing of the GOP into the dirt as Bush did today with his utterly shamefull attempt to liken Senator Obama's feelings on foreign policy with Neville Chamberland's appeasment of pre-war Nazi Germany.

Posted By: Richard | May 15, 2008 at 06:58 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

"The people who actually wrote the Constitution appear to have had a different opinion when it came to the frolicsome fairies." --Farmer Bob. Only a FROLICSOME FAIRY could come up with a phrase like FROLICSOME FAIRY. Doth the FAIRY protest too much?

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 06:59 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

I'm not getting the comments that bring up will of the people. CA voted on this in 1998. Public opinion has changed here since then. Secondly, the tyranny of the majority is to be feared. If the majority of Americans wanted women to have zero rights; or blacks to be 3/5 of a man, would that be okay? No, because the constituiton supercedes whatever bigotry the citizens have, no matter how many of them share it. Lastly, the CA legislature approved this measure twice in the last two yeaars and the GOP Govenor said the courts should decide. There you go. The people AND courts have spoken. Get over it.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 07:05 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

"For those who think homosexuality is something new I would urge them to look at the ANCIENT Greeks and even Romans - homosexuality was not looked at quite the same way as the Christians did some years later."

There were many homosexuals in ancient times. One may even characterize Sparta as a homosexual society. (Which died out, for some reason.) But never in Sparta nor in any other society where homosexuality was accepted -- or even promoted -- did they ever consider the idea that there could be marriage between a homo and another homo. For some reason it seemed ridiculous to them . . .you know, on a species-preserving instinctive level. Religion is not the root of anti-homoism. Religious proscriptions against homosexuality are not the cause of the homos' problems. Religious proscriptions against homosexuality are reactions against the problems homos cause.

Posted By: Farmer Bob | May 15, 2008 at 07:09 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

When Hillary Clinton gets and endorsement, the media announces it.
When Barack Obama get an endorsement, entire programs/discussions/panels form to discuss it's meaning. They put such titles as 'will this have an effect'?....'does endorsements matter?'.
Always trying to belittle and talk down the significance for him. THE MEDIA IS NO FRIEND OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY...I wish some of us would stop following these corporate backers. McCain was/is/ and will be the media's pick. Democrats need to go around them to get the word out-or we will always lose every 4 years.

Proof that they do not give a damn about common folks---How much discussion about the issues facing each state does the media ever discuss in-depth? Does anyone know what the concerns of WV citizens were? Do we know about KY or OR? All we get from them(media) is soundbite nonsense and fluff.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 07:10 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

"Only a FROLICSOME FAIRY could come up with a phrase like FROLICSOME FAIRY. Doth the FAIRY protest too much?" --Anonymous Faerie

It is curious. Almost the first thing a homo does when he encounters an opponent is accuse the opponent of being a homo. Surely the most powerful insult.

Posted By: Farmer Bob | May 15, 2008 at 07:15 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Obama has always said he's for civil unions. He is not for gay marriage, but FOR CIVIL UNIONS!!

Posted By: Rainy | May 15, 2008 at 07:17 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

What's wishy-washy or ambiguous? Obama has always said he supports gay unions, but not gay marriage. Check out his website.

Posted By: Christine | May 15, 2008 at 07:21 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

Farmer Bob, I'm straight and all for gay marriage. But you've definitely sucked some cock in your day. Its okay. We understand. But really, you sound like a complete moron. And to all you other idiots out there, yes, you should be able to marry a sibling, parent, or child, as long as they are of age.

Posted By: Tony | May 15, 2008 at 07:31 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

"Farmer Bob, I'm straight and all for gay marriage. But you've definitely sucked some cock in your day." -- Tony

Guys like you have very telling fantasies.

Posted By: Farmer Bob | May 15, 2008 at 07:41 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

What else is new. He is on the wrong side of every issue. Whats next, are we gonna legalize marrige to a 9 year old. The gay agenda needs to go back where it belongs...in the closet with shame not pride.

Posted By: | May 15, 2008 at 07:41 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

The far left will be to Obama like a bad cold he can't shake. Everytime one of these "California issues" comes up, Obama looses more independant voters in PA, Ohio, and Florida.

Posted By: Harriet | May 15, 2008 at 07:45 PM     
REPORT ABUSE

"The gay agenda needs to go back where it belongs...in the closet with shame not pride." You are a complete *****. You should kill yourself. A change is coming and you can't stop it. All you bigots stand no chance. Go have your fat ass wife bury you up to your neck and run you over with a lawn mower. I'm married to a woman, but if I ever get the hankering for some cock, try to stop me. ****ing ***got.

Posted By: Tony | May 15, 2008 at 07:48 PM     
REPORT ABUSE