Barack and his disappointing stance on gay marriages

As I went into my myspace account, for one of the last times, I noticed out of the corner of my eyes some videos called “Presidential Dialogues – Super Dialogue”. Needless to say my curiosity was piqued and I caught some videos about Obama’s stance on gay marriages. Now gay marriages isn’t really the biggest issue for me; however, this is a civil rights issue. Because of this, I found his answer very disappointing; especially, because he’s attempting to break the racial barrier and be the first black president of the United States yet, he won’t allow gays to be married. How perplexing is that?!

Sure he softens the blow by saying that he’ll do the best he can to make sure that “civil unions” of gay people have the same rights as that of a heterosexual marriage. He just won’t call it a marriage. I’m sorry but this type of compromising doesn’t bode well for the future and what his decisions might be on more serious and more controversial issues if he does end up winning the Presidency.

Down below are the myspace links to those videos so you can check them out yourselves:

Super Dialogue: Barack Obama – Part 4 of 10

Super Dialogue: Barack Obama – Part 6 of 10


Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Barack and his disappointing stance on gay marriages

  1. Well, I don’t think that’s what he means. And it’s not about him allowing them to marry or not, that decision, as far as I know, is left to each state. And that is a good thing, because it allows each state control of important decisions like this. That’s why MA is one of the few states that will recognize a gay “marriage” or union, I’m not sure what the actual term is in that state. Anyway, I think that the reason he said he’s not in favor of gay marriages but in favor of civil unions is because he knows that in order to change the laws in favor of gay rights, he needs to find a way to please both sides. He would like it to be accepted by all states and passed. So, instead of calling it a “marriage” you can call it a “civil union” and still get all the rights that you would get from a heterosexual marriage.

    In some issues, whether you believe in them or not, if you want to change the laws established for something so controversial in this country as gay marriages, you have to deal with this issue with diplomacy. He doesn’t say if, as an individual, he accepts gay marriages or not. He is speaking as a politician, and what his solution would be for this problem. From my point of view, it’s about trying to find a way in which his proposal would be accepted in a way that both sides would feel they are getting their way.

  2. I’m sorry dear, but you’re blind due to your loyalty (Other readers please don’t take offense. This is my wife commenting on my blog so the term “dear” is appropriate in this instance). Please look at the videos again and try to be objective. He says, and you even quoted him, he’s not in favor of gay marriage. This means he “personally” is not in favor of gay marriages; therefore, it offends his “religious” sensibilities in some silly say. However, he isn’t completely without “mercy” and he’ll try to make civil union as close to a marriage as he can possibly do.

    Remember, we’re supposedly living in a country that has a seperation of Church and state. You and I have a civil marriage not a civil union. It says so on the parchment the Mayor gave us. I do believe in smaller government and going by the Constitution. That’s why I believe, “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

    In other words, all humans are to be treated equal, regardless, of sex, race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.

  3. All I can say is that, if such unions receive the same benefits that traditional marriages do, who cares about the semantics? We can call it a “peanut butter and jelly” sandwich, for all I care! =oX

    I admit that Bama backs down on issues that are controversial. He tends to find the compromise that will ruffle the least amount of feathers.. Sadly, the world is not ready to embrace gay marriage. If he supported that hardcore, that’d pretty much shoot down his mass appeal, even if every gay person in the world supported him.

    Just my thoughts.. I am think gay unions should receive the same treatment as heterosexual marriages but I also know that the changes need to be gradual or chaos can soon endue. There are just too many ultra-conservative, so-called “religious” types that would throw a fit about this sort of thing. It could start the next religious crusade.. YIKES! >_<

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s