Subscribe to Breaking NewsVanasco: Obama’s response to Iowa decision
04.04.2009 10:26am EDT
News & Politics
From a White House statement:
“The President respects the decision of the Iowa Supreme Court, and continues to believe that states should make their own decisions when it comes to the issue of marriage. Although President Obama supports civil unions rather than same-sex marriage, he believes that committed gay and lesbian couples should receive equal rights under the law.”
Wow. Talk about underwhelming. “Respects”? How about “Congratulates”?
Obama is a lawyer. I’d like to hear his legal case for wishing to deny us equal marriage.
But maybe I’m being to harsh. How about it, 365 readers? What do you think about Obama’s reaction?
My opinion on Obama is following pretty much the same track as my opinion of Clinton in 1993. What a waste. It would have been better if he simply hadn’t said anything at all. Does he comment on all state supreme court decisions?
It is a thousand times better than what happened last year. Is he all the way yet? No. Is this response a 180 degrees different than what President Bush would have said? Yes.
Don’t forget that he restated his belief that gays and lesbians should be treated equally under the law.
This is change.
He comes across as not caring one way or another whether we get marriage equality or not. He seems to think that his way of thinking is equal to ours. He couldn’t be more wrong and we should let him know that. Seperate is never equal and he of all people should be quite aware of that and work for us,not trying to come up with a seperate solution.
This was his position throughout the campaign, so we should not be surprised by this statement. We still need to educate and convince our fellow citizens that equal access to civil marriage is fair and just. That is our job.
Thanks Barack. Thanks a lot. After all the time and money we put into getting you elected – which we COULD have put against Prop 8 – you ask Rick Warren to speak at your inauguration, and make statements like this one insinuating that LGBTers are basically on their own. (And, of course, that you oppose the right to full marriage equality.) WTF? In case you didn’t do math at Harvard, that’s over 10% of your electorate that you’re alienating.
And on a familial note: it was a FEDERAL ruling that formally struck down miscegenation laws in 1967 – when 15 states still retained the right both not to perform interracial marriages, but to criminalize them as well. And know what else, in ‘67 72% of Americans disapproved of interracial marriages while almost 50% thought it should be criminal. But those supreme court judges pressed forward regardless. Your folks were an ‘interracial’ couple, right? See how that feels?
you twat.
Pretty spineless. At least Bush was honest. He hated our guts, and his policies reflected his bigotry.
“He either is not willing to leave his religion at the door of his secular office…”
His religion actually does support gay marriage rights. He used to as well. I believe he still does, but he knows many moderate and independent voters do not. He is a politician. I believe he will work to advance gay rights, but I also believe he won’t do it until he has the political capital to do so. He is pushing through his economic agenda right now, and if the economy improves and he gets the credit for it, I think he will then move to implement a national civil union law that guarantees all the rights of marriage. But he’d better also include a clause that any state can upgrade to marriage and those that already have marriage will keep it.
I’d prefer he support full marriage rights, but I bet that is what we’ll end up with.
I want him to succeed as President, and at least when he represents us in other countries, it hasn’t been an embarrassment. That said, I can’t think anything but that he’s homophobic. I go back to the same point: What right does a man whose racial heritage would have subjected him to systemic legal inequality–what man with that heritage has the right to actively work to deny other people inclusion in this country’s civil rights? And Chuck’s right, no matter how anybody wants to spin it. Slavery equals bad, it was so bad that it was all the justification needed for the bloodiest war the US has ever known, yet a President who is widely considered to be black seems to think that gays’ concern over legal equality is some minor issue? Gays voted for Obama, yet his actions have shown far more concern with including Evangelicals and other religious people than even the simplest acknowledgement of gays. The national GOP (and most state organizations) offers no alternative, and neither do any of the other parties.
The Iowa judges did the right thing, regardless of their political backgrounds. Obama won’t even acknowledge our right to equality unless he can’t afford not to. So it’s time for us to close our wallets to the Dems unless they come with past proof of goodwill, not their standard empty words. Iowa means something to Obama, and it means something to us, too.
My response is anger. What a whimpy politician he is. He either is not willing to leave his religion at the door of his secular office, is not a supporter of equality or (most likely) is a typical no backbone politician only worried about his re-election prospects.
No surprise to me…I have not and am not a supporter of this very dissapoi nting “leader” (more follower of polls, like the last Dem we had).
But my dismay goes to our community…where is the outrage?
All of you that voted for him and have not called him about this, I say SHAME. You gave your vote, now tell him how much he has not deserved it.
Respectful, pointed letters and phone calls DO WORK. I changed the mind of our local rep in Boston pointing out his catholicism was not a reason to discriminate. He goes around using my name as an example of how to change the minds of reps.
GET ON THE PHONES. If you voted for him, demand he represent you. This statement and his position are shameful. Our silence is a sin.
Maybe each state should have made it’s own laws about slavery… oh, right..
Well….it’s about what I’d expect. No biggie either way.
Lackluster, yet positive. Reminded me of Michelle Obama on the Sept 2008 Ellen Degenerous show side-stepping ‘congratulating’ Ellen and Portia on their marriage. Why? Are they afraid it will it make their God angry?
Hopefully the Obama’s will eventually step outside the straight-only box. We ALL need equal state and federal rights, not separate rights.
Still, this same-sex married bi-national person is hopeful.
I knew he would support Iowa, but I was really hoping for more than this. I’m a little disappointed.
Luke-warm, uninspiring, and lacking progressive vision. These issues are not a time to play politics or demonstrate “bipartisanship”… show the voters why they put you in office over the competition. And let me give you a hint: it’s not because we like the way Republicans handle issues like these.
Just another Typical gay-marriage basher!