Dear Mr President,
When you parents got married, 17 (or so) States did not recognise their marriage as valid or legal. How does that make you feel? How do you suppose GLBTQ couples feel today when they know that they can marry in one state and then fly across the whole country and know that they are married/not-married as they cross state lines? EXACTLY what your parents would have experienced.
well clearly he feels bad as he condemned it
Strange in Australia the states say that marriage equality is a federal issue and not a state one….I agree, it’s quite unpractical for one state to recognise your marriage while just a few miles, across the border your marriage will have no recognition attached to it….
So each side is to spend millions of dollars to argue the right to dicriminate.
Is that millions of dollars of taxpayers money?
Either way why the need for these kinds of discriminating campaigns.
No-one should have to fight being banned or not.
It’s a disgrace.
I guess at least Obama has acknowledged this campaign is wrong.
Thing is can he do anything about it?
If it is up to the states to decide, then take away all federal benefit given to legally married straight people, or give those federal benefits to same legally sex married people in the states that allow it!
Suchj hypocrisy on the part of the Obama White House.
Barack Obama does not support same sex marriage equality.
Barack Obama supports civil partnership apartheid.
Why is he pretending to care about what happens in Minnesota, when he himself supports discrimination.
Apartheid … really? doesn’t fit my understanding of the word …
Stepping stones to full equality sometimes have to occur …
They occurred in terms of race and sex equality – gender and sexuality are no exception …
Personally I want completely transparent equal marriage regardless of the genders of those marrying – but equally there should be the option of civil partnership to all couples too
“What I know is that at minimum, a baseline is that there has to be a strong, robust civil union available to all gay and lesbian couples.”
Yes, it would be called civil marriage Obama.
The main bar to marriage Equality in the US from a federal point of view is money. Simples. Marriage Equality would mean corporations, States and the Feds all having to pay out billions in equal payments, pensions and benefits to same sex partners. It would also mean a loss of the billions gained when one half of a partnership dies as the surviving partner must pay inheritence taxes equal (straight) partners don’t have to. Then of course you have the so called Moral Majority, the religion freaks and their discrimination agendas. They cant (openly) discriminate against Black people anymore so now GLBs (and the elderly) are getting it in the neck. Thankfully they are fast becoming a dying breed and their days are numbered.
Like Australia, the main bar to marriage equality at Federal level is , in Australia the PM Julia Gillard not openly supporting it and the ruling party not coming to a party decision on it and in the States, Obama dithering on the issue … Get the PMs to openly agree on it and they can make it happen!! I see that in the UK . Cameron has NOT said he supports marriage equality only that a consultation will take place in July, with no deadline for marriage equality..is this really much better than what Obama or Gillard are promising?
He isn’t perfect, but he’s the best president America has ever had.
It’s called the democratic process, and the White House has no right to condemn it!
Adam, You are rather big on rights today suddenly ain’t ya!
“Gay, Straight, Black, White, Marriage is a Civil Right!”
There’s nothing democratic about banning people from marriage.
Paddyswurds, that’s a red herring. If banning same-sex marriage is about corporations having to pay out more in benefits to same-sex married couples, then you might as well ban any future straight couples marrying for the very same “economic” reason.
Its odd that Obama refuses to support marriage equality when the church he attended for a very long time, the United Church of Christ is arguably one of the most progressive since it supports same-sex marriage. In any event, unlike his European counterparts, no American running for the highest office could declare support for it and win the White House. Politicians there pander to their religious constituent base first and foremost and live in fear of being voted out if they offend religious nutters. Religious beliefs in America take precedence over gay rights.
Democratic process, Adam? Hmmm, now how democratic is it to deny one group of people the same rights as the rest of the country? As I’ve said many times before, in a democracy, rights are expanded not contracted. Until then, America like most western countries including the UK, is not a true democracy by any stretch of the imagination until all enjoy identical civil rights whether some disagree or not. Since when is disenfranchisement of one group of people democratic? If anything, it smacks of fascism, ergo mob rule and that’s clearly what is happening in Minnesota and elsewhere in America.
“stops short” pretty much says it all for the Obama administration. His weak DINO approach to everything lost us the midterms and turned him into an even more lame duck President than he already was. Win or loose in the next election he will do little for the people dumb enough to believe in him. He was nothing in IL and he is nothing in the White house. He is mostly a cheap copy of Reagan with business, and Clinton with social issues, a quick study of history confirms that. Republicans will continue to go relatively unhindered in their crushing of civil rights and the middle class as they have done since 1980. While the masses of asses believe the lies that the Democrats spend more when the Republicans are responsible for every major hike in the deficit. The major reason is not the Republicans, but the Democrats unwillingness to fight as hard or as well as the Republicans. The only thing one has to admire about the mean spirited evil Repugnicans is their ability to get things done.
Robert commented that the United Church of Christ is very progressive and that is true. It is however also true that Obama’s particular congregation is not and is not representative of the larger denomination, but is representative of Obama’s backward views which are the soul of his ineffective administration on multiple issues. It is small wonder that monsters like Louis Eugene Walcott aka Farrakhan are Obama fans and probably why people often mistake Obama for a Muslim. It is hard to tell Obama’s congregation apart based on their words and actions which are in almost total opposition to the UCC they pretend to be a part of.
I should have said ‘was’ instead of “are” fans of Obama in regards to the likes of Farrakhan, who now refers to Obama as Jewish since Obama did not support the old Libya. Not that it matters much as they will likely only become another Iran as they trade the tyranny of an overlord for the oppression of even more religious control. But it only takes one thing for a bigot to turn on you if they were ever for you. But a totally moronic attitude all the same as Obama has hardly been as supportive of Israel as he should be given it is the only remotely livable country in the middle east that even tries to offer any level of freedom for anyone. And the only middle eastern country that ever really was or ever really will be an ally to the west. But as with most everything in the US corporate $$$ matter more than anything else……….. In the end the only thing surprising about Obama’s weak position on MN is that he bothered to comment at all as that is more courage than he usually displays.
Well, if I look at my little country, where gay marriage is about to come, I can only say, that even if gay marriage is avail soon, there will be no REAL equality. There are adoption rights that won’t be given to a full extent. I personally call that a second class marriage. But hey, up to now, transgender people, married one, had to divorce to be allowed to get their new gender and name officially! A recent trial clearly showed that this was against any existing law, against the constitution. It was only a harrassement imposed on trans people by some hypocritic administration “Chiefs”. OK. Under the coming law, this will no longer be needed, BUT: an existing full featured marriage will be back classified to a second class marriage, with loss of parental rights ahead. So, trying to give a seemingly equality to the ones will be heavily discriminatory for others. I don’t know what the situation is about for trans population in the US, but I really wonder why nobody is talking about that!
Is it really coming to luxembourg? It seems to be taking ages??