Marriage Equality

Just to play devil’s Advocate, isn't marriage between a man and a woman?

BTW, Obama is a slick politician; he appeared to support the gay rights but didn't completely endorse the bill, if you listen to his speech in NY the night before the gay marriage right vote, very interesting. He stopped short of endorsing the bill that was pending in NY legislation but he made enough declaration that appeases the gay community.

In 2008, Bama run as a church loving, main stream American. Didn’t he say marriage was between a man and a woman then? I think the gay community wanted to see Hillary in WH but they voted for him by default. If you look back to 1996 when Bama run for IL senate, at that time he signed a pledge conforming he supported gay marriage, but in 2008 he run a little different coz he wanted the religious votes.

Now in 2011 he is in a pickle. His numbers are tanking, so he realizes he need the gay votes but also recognizes he still need the religious vote as well. He is in a political Catch 22 here, he knows the majority of voters are still against gay marriage and want to reserve marriage b/n a man and a woman so he is trying’ to triangulate & fenece, by indicating to gay crowd, he is pro gay wink, wink, nod, nod…. and he will go right to the line of support but not endorse it, he needs to stop short of saying he endorses gay marriage because he needs the religious votes (mostly blks, Hispanic and southern whites, these communities have strong conservative church going streak and family values that run thru them) so if he came out and endorse the bill 100 %, he will risk erosion of these votes. He knows he is in a box here so he did what a politician would do…. some folks are saying he is a flip flopper I call it being a smooth operator. Personally, I am not sure if the Bamas are terribly religious folks, they haven’t been to church since they arrived at the white house, I think he is prolly a secular individual.

 

Marriage existed way before the institution of the Abrahamic religion injected its own definition of marriage - which had more to do with generational offspring (male dominance) and property rights than loving, consenting adults. When defining marriage from a basic standpoint, it's more of a pact between individuals. This was a loose term given that tribes could marry other people regardless of who they are. But this was a way to establish a group or society coming together.

And Obama's position on gay rights is almost concrete. He continuously advocated civil unions and domestic partnerships for same-sex couples, as well as benefits extended to them on the same plain as heterosexual couples. Remember last year? A lesbian couple, one of which was dying and her partner was not allowed to see her because 1) No recognition of same-sex partnerships of any kind and 2) Because of that, they weren't considered a couple. Well, Obama did sign an executive order mandating that hospitals allow visitation rights for same-sex couples. So, he does advocate for gay rights...

BUT...

...you are correct that he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman. I do recall him signing some pledge relating to gay rights, but I think he didn't commit to the gay marriage aspect. Honestly, going back to the 2008 primaries for the Democratic party, out of all the politicians, only two candidates actually advocated for gay marriage: Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich. The rest were against it, but as of late, Dodd was the only one who reversed his decision.

And lastly, Obama is a secular individual, but still a practicing Christian. You can still retain your faith as well as uphold secularism in your personal life. You do come off as such as well, DOA, assuming that I'm correct based on your posts.

 

I guess you might be right. The term secular Christian can prolly apply to me as well. But it depends in who is defining and using the term. To some the term means a non fundamentalist Christian that carries liberal views, one who don't follow all of the traditions of the religion but have strong relationship with Christ. Others equate the term almost to Militant Darwinist and think the term is an oxymoron label coz secular means- of relating to worldly things as distinguished from things relating to church and religion; not sacred or religious; temporal, worldly. So they have a hard time understanding the existence of a Secular Christian.

 

When individuals define themselves as secular, it generally points to the direction of understanding how the world works without the viewpoint of spiritual means. It doesn't quite mean liberal, although secularists tend to hold more progressive views on a variety of issues.

And you would be correct that there are such people as Secular Christians. By recognizing and understanding how the world works relating to what we've discovered through science and reasoning, yet reaffirm a strong conviction of the concepts embodied in Christianity, you are still a Christian, albeit a secular one at that. You should consider someone like Dr. Francis Collins. He was appointed by Obama to be the head of the National Institute of Health. Even individuals like Richard Dawkins and the whole science community revere him as an excellent contributor to the scientific community. And get this...he's a strong Christian, but is able to separate his faith from science.

He finds intelligent design and creationism to be complete "bollocks" and yet still believes that science and faith can work well together. I may not agree with that assessment, but I do respect him, especially he's the daddy of the Human Genome Project.

 

BBW, Thanx for the link, good read.

 

Anytime. I'm more than an angry face.

 

hooray for sodomy!

take that, King James Bible!

 

you know sodomy is both oral and anal sex right?,lol

 

He knows all too well. To him, it's like a great replacement for herbal enemas.

 

The government on the local/state/federal level should always recognize the marriage of two consenting adults, regardless of sexual preference.

People get it twisted thinking marriage equality has anything to do with what a particular church or religious denomination condones. It doesn't.

And unless you know gay couples socially, their getting married will have no bearing on your life whatsoever.

My Baptist church will NEVER condone gay marriage or marry a gay couple, even through married gay couples will attend services there.

This is a legal matter, not a moral one.

 

coulda fooled me

u bunch of godless heathens

 

Has no affect on me and if it means there are two more happier people on this planet then go for it. I support the LGBT community as much as I can.

 

Here's some photos of the celebration:

 

Nothing more needs to be said.

 

These points are indeed very poignant.

Even if one is to disagree with it, it does not give anyone the right to say two consenting law abiding, tax paying adults shouldn't be entitled to make their own choices in life and given the rights as other adults.

I don't believe a church or any religious affiliation should have to endorse their marriages if said bodies feel marriage is between a man and woman.

However as far as the legal rights gays are entitled to it under the laws of our nation as all others and that should includes marriage and the benefits it entails that go beyond the spiritual realm.

Just as there are those who believe races shouldn't mix and they are entitled to that belief but not for one second can they have the capacity to deny my rights to be with a woman of another race.

The same application exists, even if someone may not look favorably upon gays that should not give us the capacity to deny them rights.

I know how I would feel if someone told me you cannot legally marry a white woman. That would be a resounding slap in my face as a man that prides myself on individuality.

As YMRA and Andre pointed out, let people live their lives and let them have the same legal rights as you and I would expect as adults. What they do in their personal lives is their business.

Race and sexual preferences are apples and oranges, nonetheless it boils down to providing everyone with the same legal rights in our society.