health care is important, but protecting LG people who want to marry is an equalities issue.
Just because this “celebrity” doesn’t hold it in any esteem (at the moment!), it doesn’t mean that her views are of any greater moment than mine. At least I want to advance equality
Lets not start attacking Beth because the way this has been spun. Shes one of teh greatest role models we have right now – shes incredibly political and vocal, shes just saying that there are some things which take priority. I think the war, healthcare and so on are priorities, it doesnt mean marriage is not important – it totally is, just there is lots to do.
Way to score an own goal Beth! It may not be important for you but it is for others and they deserve equal rights under the law.
I get her point about prioritising issues but I am still shocked that Obama’s administration is fighting to keep DOMA they compared gay marriage to incest and paedophilia in their statements. Marriage is not for everyone sure but while the situation exists that a minority group is denied to certain people because they are gay is unfair and discriminatory regardless of Beth Ditto’s opinion on it.
I suspect Obama would like to wait until his 2nd term to deal with gay issues (no re-election to worry about). But that’s working on the assumption he gets re-elected. And that’s not guaranteed.
Yes, why should blacks get married? Black marriage isn’t the most important thing – the war, healthcare, etc are more important! Let’s stop blacks getting married!
*Misquotation warning: this post contains sarcasm.*
I do see the point she is trying to make, but – as with any commentator saying the same – it falls down when someone asks: exactly when has America NOT been at war/in ‘whatever’, and when will it next be so again?
If you operate on the premise that a government cannot multitask beyond the most immediate crises, then you can neither expect anything to change nor explain how anything was changed in the past.
For the record; of course Obama isn’t a hater – but indifference or insubstantial support yields much the same result.
equality is always important. lives are fleeting but equality is (hopefully) forever.
beth. f–k off.
Her premise is faulty: she suggests that dealing with one issue, precludes dealing with another. Politicians always deal with more than one issue at a time. Why is she putting gay rights last? I agree with more than one person on these comments: she appears to have issues with self-worth.
My Civil Partnership means that now our greedy relatives cannot grab anything, if me or the man I’m Partnered with dies first. Our respective fammilies could have laid claim, but we are saved by our ‘Marrage Certificate from the Town Hall Regestra, So Beth, is Marrage still stupid?
LOL I wonder how many people here are doing anything for equality – except for trying to bring down the only lesbian pop icon in the world at the moment
as I said just because she’s a celeb doesn’t make her an expert, an oracle, or even someone who should be listened to in preference to any other lesbian or gay person?
Her “iconhood” can’t preclude her from criticism.
And I head my employer’s LGBT group and have just finished a week of LGBT promotions in the office. I also advise my TU on LGBT issues as well as maintaining a watching brief on HR policy. That good enough to prove my credentials?
How long does it really take to change a few words in a law?
What do politicians do all day every day?
“look busy, Jesus is coming” springs to mind
Don’t ask me where i heard that, i can’t remember
Politics and law-making has always been about the art of the possible. It could be, I suggest but I don’t know, that President Obama would personally very much like to scrap the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ rule but is meeting such opposition to so doing that it could jeopardise his other necessary reforms of the system in other unrelated fields.
I guess, but it’s only my guess, that there is major opposition to scrapping DADT within his own party in the Senate and the House and that if he moves to unilaterally scrap DADT then that could mean that his other proposed reforms might be blocked. If that’s the case then we might not see the abolition of DADT until the end of his second term (assuming that he’s elected for a second term, that is – and remember, Presidents of the USA can only serve two terms) so some of his more controversial decisions might be delayed right up to the final moments of his administration in order that he can secure the rest of his legislative programme.
Yes, I know that that is an awful thought, that our rights as gay people might be hostage to the rights of others, but that’s the way the world works. In the meantime we have to continue our work to change public opinion about us in such ways that the population at large comes to realise that LGBT people who volunteer to serve, and die, for their country are deserving of the same respect and rights as everyone else.
This is not about whether the war against the medieval forces of primitive Islamic terrorism is justified or not, nor is it about the political decision by our elected representatives to conduct such a war (we can get rid of them and change the policy at any election); it’s about the loyalty and the bravery of our serving gay military personnel and their rights to basic human rights. Please, let us not confuse the two issues.
Whether or not the war against the primitive forces operating, as they always have done, within Islam is right or wrong is completely irrelevant to the struggle for gay rights in the USA military. Gaining rights for LGBT service people in the USA is a problem which is exclusively confined, in my opinion, to the political necessities of the current USA administration.
I don’t believe that President Obama is against scrapping DADT but I do acknowledge that that move might just render his Presidency dead-in-the-water vis-a-vis other important reforms if he were to force it through at this time. We civilian gay people have to help him by continuing our efforts to persuade civil society to accept, despite the disinformation, smears and lies of the religious and the merely prejudiced, that gay rights in both civil society and the military world are only natural justice and long overdue given our ongoing loyal service to our countries.
It’s not enough to have a President on our side, we need a majority in the country and in Congress and that we haven’t got. Until we get that the President can’t move without placing the rest of his programme at risk.
The war in Afghanistan may be, in your opinion which you are entitled to, wrong and wrong-headed and I might I happen to disagree with that, but our disagreement on that point in no way mitagates against the bravery and the loyalty of our troops – male of female, gay or straight, transgendered or otherwise – and in no way mitigates against the need for equal treatment of all sexualities in the military of the USA such as we now have in the UK.
If a president can start a war by executive order, defying the US Constitution, can’t Barack Obama by the same kind of order legalize gay marriage? The paperwork is prepared by his staff and all he has to do is sign the document. After that he can take care of world-peace, the environment and some other stuff.
“…. only lesbian pop icon in the world at the moment”
No, the one with the biggest mouth and a gift for self-promotion.
Just because Beth doesn’t want something, doesn’t mean she can dictate what others should have. Also, her argument is facile in the extreme.
Obama clearly isn’t going to do much of anything for gays in the US. He’s shown his true colors and he’s got a huge gay problem right now. No more $$ from the community for his crumbs. He can do something @ DADT and will not. No votes for the republiscum party of course but no $$$ for the democrats until something of substance occurs. He is truly a dissapointment (but better than the Rscum).
I agree with this fat chick. All marriage is ridiculous with its more than 50% failure rate. What good is it? For tax breaks? The sake of children? Chattel and property claims? Most of those things can be done with legal documents. Does having your governmental or religious oppressors sanctioning your relationship make it any more valid? If you think so, your union is weak and flawed on its own accord and to begin with. Plus married people are daft.
In 5 years or so when this fatass has a coronary and her careers is further in the crapper than it is now and she may need her gf’s health insurance she might see the importance of gay marriage. This airhead is is THEE walking example of what being UNHEALTHY looks like so I will not be taking any of my marching orders from this slob. I am a dues paying lesbian and have no idea who this lardass is, the LAST thing she is, is a ROLE MODEL! ??? Seriously dykes get a self-esteem and stop looking up to morons whose only virtue is they have big mouths and never shut the hell up.
She is willing to follow Obama to the slaughterhouse in order to prove to herself that she didn’t get duped. Obama voters were fooled by a simple parlor trick! He has EXPANDED the war on terror. Can someone educated this liberal idiot please. He has sent over 30,000 trooops to Afghanistan to EXPAND the war that he promised to end in 16 months. Do morons like this even bother to be informed? Obama also EXPANDED the Patriot Act after pledging to REPEAL it! He has betrayed the gay community worse than Bill. He is a BIGOT who said that he does not believe in Gay Marriage because “GOD IN IN THE MIX”. Just because this hump of a woman can’t find anyone who wants to marry her does not mean she should be preaching about what civil rights I deserve in the United States of America. Eff this pig is what I have to say. Sorry! And PLEASE LESBIANS GET SOME REAL ROLE MODELS!
Well done Beth. Half the radicals on here tell us that we should be contemptuous of “assimilating” with the heteros. The other half say we should be demanding “marraige”. I’m perfectly happy with our civil partnership that gives us all the rights of heterosexual couples but doesn’t require us to assimilate with them either.
Well Obama is clearly just another moron politician who promises the world while all along he is simply lying.
If I was in the US I would not vote. What’s the point. Nothing ever changes and while the military-industrial complex controls both Houses then voting is a complete waste of time.
Direct action is a more effective way of changing things in a country which has only 2 political parties and whose political system is designed to ensure that it is 100% impossible to change this.
If you don’t want to get married then good; don’t get married. Legalising gay marriage won’t “require” that you enter into one.
Comments like yours and Ms. Ditto’s are what’s worst about the gay community: gays actively demeaning our fight for equal rights. You didn’t hear many blacks in 1960s America saying “I don’t think segregation is that big of a deal, in fact I quite LIKE sitting at the back of the bus.”
Mmmm a role model? I feel sorry for the young lesbians of the world, also if she is the only lesbian pop icon in the world – lets do without.
Why, oh why do people not understand that with celebrity and wealth come a resposibility to the people who look up to and idolise them.
*Note to all: engage brain BEFORE opening mouth!
@ Vince – A very clever person once said to me “if you do not vote you have done nothing to try and change the situation, therefore you have no right to an opinion”
to get what a marriage of CP give, youi need to have a watertight will, enduring power of attorney, living will, tax arrangements (that don’t necessarily cover inheritance issues)
are yiou sure you want to leave it to luck and that CP won’t have strange exceptions and holes?
that should have read” to get what a marriage OR CP give”
Barry: “I feel sorry for the young lesbians of the world, also if she is the only lesbian pop icon in the world – lets do without.”
Don’t worry, Barry – she’s not. SHE might think she’s an icon, but she’s far from it in my opinion, and there are other lesbian singers who are smarter, nicer and have better voices.
Would it be a coincidence that she has a big UK tour starting soon….?
Brian….civil partnerships do not provide marriage certificates, only marriage can do that. Civil partnerships are not marriages by government definition and are not on statute as such unfortunately. Even when a gay British couple marries overseas, say in Canada for example, they are issued a marriage certificate but upon return to the UK, our government choosed to use a convenient form of dyslexia by reading it as a civil partnership which it clearly isn’t. The reason they do that is that it would invite LGBT people to demand full marriage equality for those who want it. Clearly no British government wants it and neither does StonewallUK and the so called majority of British gays who they claim to speak for. We’re the only country supposedly where its gay citizens don’t want the right to marry apparently. Its going to catch up with us sooner or later.