Wednesday, May 09, 2012

Obama Endorses Marriage Equality

As had been anticipated, President Obama today made a statement supporting the right of same-sex couples to marry.  From MSNBC:
President Barack Obama endorsed the right of same-sex couples to marry on Wednesday, a landmark pronouncement made in light of mounting pressure from gay rights advocates.

Obama became the first U.S. president to back the right of gay and lesbian couples to marry, a reversal from views expressed during the 2008 campaign, when he said he opposed same-sex marriage but favored civil unions as an alternative.

Obama told ABC News that, after reflection, he had "concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married."

In making his announcement, Obama completes what he had described as an “evolution” in his views on this issue, hastened by growing fervor this week involving gay rights. The growing pressure was capped Tuesday by North Carolina voters’ approval of a constitutional amendment banning not only same-sex marriages, but civil unions for gay and lesbian couples, as well.

Obama’s shift not only speaks to a broad swath of the electorate, which has exhibited increasing acceptance of same-sex marriage in opinion polls, but also gay and lesbian voters who compose a core part of Obama’s base, and have been major fundraisers for his re-election.  Obama: 'I think same sex couples should be able to get married'
Some observers, for instance Chris Matthews, have suggested that perhaps supporting marriage equality is too risky a political move, that the President might end up alienating key voters that he will need in the upcoming election.  On the other hand, his statements about "evolving" were transparently ingratiating, it was too clearly a case of a politician avoiding discussion of a controversial topic that he obviously had an opinion about.  Only time will tell whether this declaration works for him or against him in the long run -- and let's not forget that he is the master of eleven-dimensional chess.  If I were a Republican I would not feel too smug right now.


Anonymous Bose in St. Peter MN said...

And, as a person who supports marriage equality and wants to see Obama reelected, I'm not feeling smug about how this impacts the election.

Obama's step today, while the first for a sitting president, still strikes me as cautious: Supporting marriage equality, and yet leaving it possible that his support may not change the way he governs by much. He's not up for challenging states with constitutional amendments, he's not changing DOJ responses toward DOMA.

It will be interesting to see whether/how that caution impacts religious conservatives in states like North Carolina -- will pastors be as as forcefully involved leading up to November as they've just been?

May 09, 2012 4:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

while I now disagree with Obama on this issue, I think it is a positive for him to drop the hypocrisy

probably won't hurt much since pro-family supporters aren't likely voting for him anyway

so as long as he doesn't personally start to advocate an amendment to the Constitution, this shouldn't hurt him

May 09, 2012 4:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

while I now disagree with Obama on this issue, I think it is a positive for him to drop the hypocrisy

probably won't hurt much since pro-family supporters aren't likely voting for him anyway

so as long as he doesn't personally start to advocate an amendment to the Constitution, this shouldn't hurt him

May 09, 2012 4:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Wednesday reiterated that he opposes same-sex marriage, a few hours after President Barack Obama said for the first time he supports it.

"My view is that marriage itself is a relationship between a man and a woman and that's my own preference," Romney told reporters in Oklahoma.

May 09, 2012 7:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

that obama, man

he's a real horse's ass

May 09, 2012 7:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"My view is that marriage itself is a relationship between a man and a woman and that's my own preference,"

It's my own preference too, but I wouldn't think to impose my preference on anyone else.

May 09, 2012 8:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

completely illogical

if the government doesn't recognize something that's a passive act

an imposition, by definition, is active not passive

gays, by insisting on endorsement of their relationship by the rest of us, are the ones imposing

May 09, 2012 8:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mitt Romney, the Republican president hopeful, was once a strong supporter of equal rights for gays. In 1994, during the Massachusetts Senate race, Mitt Romney's views on gay equality ran left to those of his opponent, Democrat veteran Ted Kennedy. In 2006, Bay Windows, a Boston gay newspaper published excerpts from a letter then written by Romney to the Log Cabin Republicans, seeking support in the race against Kennedy. He wrote, "If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern." He went on to write, "My opponent cannot do this. I can and will." Of course, Romney lost the round. However, it has to be pointed out that he fared better than most other candidates who had, in the past, contested against Kennedy.

Following his failure, Romney continued to woo the homosexual and lesbian community. As recently as 2002, when he was vying for governor, he was at pains to declare his solidarity with the gay community. In 2002, he attended the Boston Gay Pride Parade, and along with his running mate Kerry Healey, distributed fliers, which said, "Mitt and Kerry wish you a great Pride weekend."

Subsequently however, Mitt Romney flip flopped and radically shifted from his position.

May 09, 2012 9:24 PM  
Anonymous David S. Fishback said...

Mini-debate on the issue between me and WMAL talk show host Chris Plante on Channel 9 earlier today:

Same Sex Marriage Debate

May 09, 2012 11:33 PM  
Anonymous GOP attacks on women's rights continue said...

As more politicians continue to promote anti-women policies both locally and nationally, one suggestion that has been made to combat their efforts is a simple one — get more women elected to politics. Women legislators are the best ones to know how these oppressive policies will really effect women in the real world, and would be the most likely to fight against them being made law.

Unfortunately, Missouri has caught on. To nip that problem in the bud, the state legislature has a simple solution. Cut off access to programs that can help women get into government.

According to the Kansas City Star, “The Missouri House has passed legislation aimed at shutting down an institute that trains women for roles in government and politics. The measure, approved Monday night by a 93-59 vote, targets the Sue Shear Institute for Women in Public Life at the University of Missouri-St. Louis.”

So why is the legislature intent on killing the program? Because it “churns out liberal trainees for Democrats,” claims local Republicans.

But is the claim true? Not at all, says the Institute, which has passionately responded with “disappointment” to the legislative action on their own website. “Especially disappointing is the fact that among those championing the effort to dismantle the Institute are women who have benefited from Sue Shear Institute programs, or have supported the Institute as donors or faculty members for Institute programs, including the 21st Century Leadership Academy.

The Institute itself is nonpartisan, of course, and is dedicated to helping women get into politics and government. Now, if the women candidates that come out of the training program all seem to be Democrats, perhaps that is less a sign of a problem with the Institute, and more of a sign of problems with the Republican party’s anti-woman platform.

May 10, 2012 7:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

how sad that Obama, who campaigned as a uniter, beyond blue and red, is working so hard to divide Americans

a war on women?

if Missouri is trying to balance their budget and money is being spent by the government to "train women for roles in government and politics", sounds like the kind of wasteful spending on something that should not be charged to taxpayers that is a perfect for cutting back

I doubt few Republicans or independents would disagree

May 10, 2012 7:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"gays, by insisting on endorsement of their relationship by the rest of us, are the ones imposing"

LGBT people just want the same rights as everyone else, including the right to marry the person they love.

Americans are all equal, with equal rights and with the same right to be equally protected under the law.

"The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The Equal Protection Clause can be seen as an attempt to secure the promise of the United States' professed commitment to the proposition that "all men are created equal" by empowering the judiciary to enforce that principle against the states."

May 10, 2012 7:15 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"LGBT people just want the same rights as everyone else,"

they've got them

"including the right to marry the person they love"

no one, whether gay or normal, has that right

in order to marry someone, under the law, that potential spouse must be of the opposite gender, unrelated, of age, not married to anyone else, living, human, and willing

these restrictions apply equally to everyone

this "anyone you love" line is rhetoric

"Americans are all equal, with equal rights and with the same right to be equally protected under the law"

and they are

marriage is not synonymous with protection

lunatic fringe gay advocates have absolutely no regard for proper use of the English language

May 10, 2012 7:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Endless Suffrage 2012 - States' Rights Edition

May 10, 2012 8:16 AM  
Anonymous Robert said...

Hurray for Obama!

May 10, 2012 8:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

congrats to Obama

he has decided he doesn't need this stupid President job, after all

May 10, 2012 8:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

while I thought yesterday that Obama had helped himself by coming out of the closet with his real views on gay "marriage", today he is already doing his campaign damage:

"WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama's campaign is using his support of gay marriage to draw a contrast with Republican rival Mitt Romney.

The morning after Obama publically embraced same-sex marriage, his campaign released a web video titled "Mitt Romney: Backwards on Equality."

The video opens with Obama saying same-sex couples should be allowed to get married, followed by a clip of Romney saying Wednesday that he opposes gay marriage and favors rolling back some rights for same-sex couples.

The video also tries to portray Romney as out of touch with the majority of Americans, saying even former Republican President George W. Bush supported civil unions."

May 10, 2012 12:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

this is all going to wind up with Mitt benefitting from positive backlash

"WASHINGTON -- Mitt Romney made a surprise appearance on Fox host Brian Kilmeade's radio show Thursday morning to respond to a lengthy Washington Post story on his time as a prep-school prankster and occasional bully of closeted gay students.

"They talk about the fact that I played a lot of pranks in high school," Romney said. "And they describe some that you just say to yourself, back in high school I just did some dumb things and if anybody was hurt by that or offended by it, obviously I apologize."

“I participated in a lot of hijinks and pranks during high school and some might have gone too far and for that, I apologize," he added.

It's never quite clear whether a politician's high school years are fair game for political attacks. Romney suggested during the interview that the acts he was apologizing for were merely youthful indiscretions; the Post described him pinning a closeted gay classmate to the ground and cutting his long hair, for example. But with the story suggesting latent homophobia in an adolescent Romney and with President Barack Obama having endorsed same-sex marriage on Wednesday, the piece reverberated.

Still, Romney said he was "not going to be too concerned" about the item. He insisted that he grew up in a tolerant environment and that there was nothing about his pranks that were discriminatory towards gays."

May 10, 2012 12:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

with such great choices from the Outer Banks to the Great Smokies and fantastic BBQ everywhere in between, I hope everyone vacations in North Carolina this summer

I know Democrats will:

"Democratic officials say that the DNC convention isn't moving anywhere in the wake of an anti-gay rights vote by North Carolina voters.

"The convention is staying in Charlotte," said Kristie Greco, director of communications and public affairs for the Democratic National Convention Committee.

Grassroots supporters took to petition site and to Twitter to demand that Democrats move their nominating convention out of Charlotte and to a state that treats "all citizens equally" after Tarheel state voters rattified an amendment to ban gay marriage Tuesday. In less than 24 hours, the petition had garnered more than 23,000 signatures.

"On May 8th, the people of North Carolina voted in support of Amendment One, a constitutional amendment that discriminates against LGBT people, couples & their families. In protest, the Democratic National Convention Committee should MOVE its convention (September 2012) to a state that upholds values of equality & liberty, and which treats ALL citizens equally," the petition demands.

Democratic officials have touted the convention's openness to grassroots supporters — and emphasized that it will give those supporters unprecedented access to do voter mobilization and other outreach in a swing state.

But it's not the only controversy about the selection of Charlotte — labor officials were also upset by the selection of a right-to-work state over a closed-shop state."

May 10, 2012 12:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If there’s been one constant over the course of President Barack Obama’s evolution on gay marriage, it’s this: The White House’s keen awareness of the radioactive politics of the issue.

And the White House is right to be concerned.

No doubt, Obama gets some political pluses out of supporting same-sex marriage Wednesday — energizing LGBT voters and donors, and simply reminding people that yes, he came to Washington to do big things.

But for all the polls showing movement toward greater public acceptance of gay marriage, for all the signs of increased tolerance and changing mores, there’s one undeniable fact: A full embrace of gay rights has never been a winner in the political arena.

Fifteen years of ballot measures in more than 30 states from coast-to-coast show an issue that has been rejected every time it’s gone before the voters — often by large margins.

Here are seven states where Obama just bought himself headaches with his historic decision to back gay marriage:

North Carolina

A political rule of thumb: You don’t want to be on the wrong side of an issue supported by 6-in-10 voters. But that’s where the president is in North Carolina, which occupies a central location in the political universe — it’s not only a key swing state, it’s the place that will host the Democratic National Convention this summer.


One day, gay marriage might be enshrined in law across the map. But it won’t be until after the current generation of senior citizens passes away. Not only do they oppose it by lopsided margins, they also vote in disproportionately high percentages.


The new capital of evangelicalism? No, it’s not in the South. It’s Colorado Springs, according to Christianity Today magazine, which once described the city as having “more megachurches, megaseminaries, and mega-Christian activity than any other American city.”

After Denver, Colorado Springs is the largest city in the most important state in the Mountain West — the city is bigger than Cleveland or Pittsburgh. The evidence of that came in 2006, when Colorado voters passed an amendment to outlaw gay marriage — a measure strongly supported by the Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family.


Utah may be the LDS heartland but Nevada ranks among the top five states in terms of percentage of Mormon population. And the LDS church opposes gay marriage.


In 2009, the Iowa Supreme Court made history with its unanimous decision to allow same-sex marriage.

One year later, Iowa voters made history again by ousting three of the justices who handed down that ruling.


There are many Democrats who already concede Missouri is a lost cause for Obama in 2012, even though he only lost to John McCain there by a razor-close margin in 2008.

Wednesday’s announcement only makes the situation worse. In a state where there’s no room for error, the president has taken a position that places him at odds with 71 percent of the state — at least that’s the percentage that voted to ban gay marriage when it was on the ballot in 2004.


It’s often said that the 2004 gay marriage initiative that passed in Ohio played a key role in lifting George W. Bush to victory over John Kerry. Whether that’s true or not, it’s an issue that resonates outside of Democratic vote centers like Columbus and Cleveland.

Recent polls continue to show that a majority in Ohio oppose gay marriage, compared with only about one-third of voters who support it.

May 10, 2012 12:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

thanks, Barry

we needed that:

"Representative Pete Sessions, who leads the Republican Party’s re-election efforts in the U.S. House, said the Tea Party movement remains “angry and energized” almost two years after it helped Republicans take control of the House.

Sessions, who spoke today at a breakfast in Washington sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor, said Tea Party activists have as their chief goals repealing President Barack Obama’s health care law and controlling federal spending. He spoke the morning after Republican Richard Lugar of Indiana, a six-term Senate veteran, lost in a primary to Indiana State Treasurer Richard Mourdock, who was backed by the anti-tax-and- spending movement."

May 10, 2012 1:05 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Bad anonymous said "no one, whether gay or normal, has that right [of marriage].

False. The supreme court ruled in Loving vs Virginia that the right to marry is a fundamental civil right. The right to marry means nothing if it does not include the right to marry the person of one's choosing.

If John has the right to marry Jane then Suzy must also have the right to marry Jane - anything else is sex discrimination.

May 10, 2012 5:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

nasty Priya:

I listed a number of restrictions on who you may marry that are readily accepted by all citizens, including judges

additionally, the partnership would have to qualify as a marriage or else it's irrelevant

you can't marry someone of the same gender any more than you can drink a bar of gold

it's nonsense

in order to qualify for U.S. citizenship, you have to take a test demonstrating more understanding of the Constitution than you possess

don't bother trying

May 10, 2012 8:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the first polls since Obama announced he was going gay have been released and Romney now leads Obama by 4 points

the good news, however, is that Obama still leads Ron Paul

by one point


this may be the first and last time any President supports replacing the ancient institution of marriage with a new gay model

May 11, 2012 5:55 AM  
Anonymous this is leadership? said...

WASHINGTON — Shortly before President Barack Obama voiced his support for gay marriage, Vice President Joe Biden apologized to the president for comments that forceed him to make his public pronouncement.

Biden and Obama spoke in the Oval Office on Wednesday, a person familiar with the exchange said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the private talk. Obama accepted his vice president's apology.

Biden's comments pushed gay marriage to the forefront of the presidential race and focused a fresh spotlight on Obama's vague position on the matter. The president, who once opposed gay marriage, had been dodging the issue for years, saying that his personal views were "evolving."

The vice president spoke out on gay marriage without White House consent, leaving Obama aides deeply frustrated.

In an interview with ABC News, Obama said he wasn't angry at Biden, though he thought the vice president had gotten "a little bit over his skis" by voicing his support for gay marriage ahead of his boss.

"Would I have preferred to have done this in my own way, without there being a lot of notice to everybody? Sure," Obama said. "But all's well that ends well."

The White House and Obama's presidential campaign at first tried to play down Biden's remarks, insisting that the vice president had gone no further in support of gay marriage. But gay rights advocates latched onto Biden's remarks, declaring him the highest-ranking U.S. official to support gay marriage.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan, a longtime friend of the president, stirred the political pot further on Monday, declaring unequivocally that he also supported gay marriage.

By Tuesday morning, the president came to the conclusion that he couldn't stay silent on the issue any further. The White House hastily arranged a television interview with ABC News for Wednesday, during which Obama explained to the public that he had decided it was important for him to "affirm that same-sex couples should be able to get married."

May 11, 2012 8:15 AM  
Anonymous let 'em eat cake at gay marriages said...

Obama attended a gala event at the Los Angeles home of actor George Clooney on Thursday night that raised nearly $15 million.

Obama acknowledged the challenges that a slow recovery means for his re-election in his remarks at Clooney's sprawling canyon home.

"Part of the reason we need more cash and that it's going to be harder to convince Americans to vote for us," he said, "is because folks are still hurting out there."

May 11, 2012 9:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

NEW YORK -- Mitt Romney will wade into the debate over gay marriage during a commencement speech on Saturday at a Christian university in Virginia, his campaign said Friday.

"He will mention the fact that marriage is an enduring institution which deserves to be defended," a senior Romney adviser told reporters on a Friday afternoon conference call.

After President Barack Obama announced Wednesday that he now supports gay marriage, there has been much speculation about how Romney will handle the issue during his speech Saturday at Liberty University, a school in southwest Virginia that has 12,500 students and bills itself as the "largest Christian university in the world."

Romney's speech at Liberty is a unique moment, coming as it does at a school whose founder, the Rev. Jerry Falwell, was one of the most public evangelical faces involved in the "culture wars" in the 1980s.

A robust defense of traditional marriage between a man and a woman could help Romney with the key evangelical voting bloc.

On Thursday, senior Romney adviser Ed Gillespie said that Romney's opposition to gay marriage is "a significant difference in November" between him and Obama.

"This is not a policy speech," the adviser said. "It is a speech for the graduates and their parents."

"It's a personal speech, where Governor Romney will talk about what he's learned from his own life experience, and he'll share some of those life lessons with the graduates," the Romney adviser said. "He will talk about personal responsibility, the dignity of hard work and the commitments of family."

"He will talk about the big picture of how our Judeo-Christian tradition includes such American values as religious freedom," the adviser said. "He'll also talk about how trusting in God makes for a good life."

May 11, 2012 10:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The increasing number of young people who strongly support pro-life causes has prompted the president of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) Pro-Choice America to resign at the end of the year.

Nancy Keenan, 60, cited NARAL’s own data in telling The Washington Post Thursday that “new and younger leadership” is needed to reach Millennials — people between the ages of 18 and 34.

“The reasons she gave were just such a victory for the pro-life movement, because she acknowledges that they have been losing the new generation of young women,” said Janice Crouse, Ph.D., a senior fellow at the Beverly LaHaye Institute.

“The next (leader) will preside over a declining NARAL, a declining Planned Parenthood, declining National Organization for Women. The future does not look really good for them.”

According to The Washington Post, NARAL’s own 2010 survey of 700 Millennials showed 51 percent of pro-life voters under 30 consider abortion “very important” in elections, compared to only 26 percent of their peers who support abortion.

Kristan Hawkins, the 26-year-old executive director of Students for Life of America, agreed that an “intensity gap” exists between Millennials on the issue.

“I definitely see the intensity gap on college campuses,” she said. “We have nearly 700 groups operating nationally, compared with Planned Parenthood’s 200 groups. (The pro-abortion groups) are dead. There is nothing going on. They only time we see them is when they are reacting to a Students for Life event.”

Hawkins said passing the baton to younger leadership is a solid move, but doubts it will reverse current trends.

“(The pro-abortion groups) have billions of dollars and the media on their side in promoting death,” she said. “It’s not going to be enough. They are on the defensive. We have truth on our side. We will ban abortion in our lifetime.”

According to the Guttmacher Institute, states passed a total of 92 laws limiting abortion in 2011. The fact that Millennials will make up 40 percent of the electorate by 2020 bodes well for future pro-life legislation and candidates.

The turning tide is not limited to the United States. Joyce Arthur, executive director of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, recently told Canadian media there “definitely … is a huge surge in young people being active in the (pro-life) movement.”

Keenan headed NARAL, the nation’s oldest pro-abortion group, for eight years.

“Keenan’s resignation is a desperate move on behalf of the pro-abortion lobby to stem the tide as the new millennial, pro-life generation is willing to stand up for preborn lives,” said Dawn McBane, manager of Rising Voice, CitizenLink’s social policy outreach to Millennials.

May 11, 2012 11:55 PM  
Anonymous quite right, ol' chap said...

I think it's quite decent of Obama to give someone else a chance to be President

I may even watch him next Spring when he competes on Celebrity Apprentice!!

May 12, 2012 7:56 AM  
Anonymous Obama looking for site for his library soon said...

Congressional Democrats, who don’t agree with President Barack Obama’s endorsement of same-sex marriage, now find they’re in an awkward spot.

Senators Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Jon Tester of Montana are among Democrats facing questions about their stand on the issue and whether they are swayed by the president’s support, which he announced May 9. McCaskill, Manchin and Tester are seeking re-election this year in Republican-leaning states. None back gay marriage.

“If they’re smart, they won’t change what they’ve been saying,” said John Pitney, a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College in Claremont, California.

Republicans have called attention to Obama’s announcement, which they say will pull votes away from Democratic candidates in Republican-leaning states.

“The president was looking at his own political prospects,” Senator John Thune of South Dakota, a member of the chamber’s Republican leadership, said in an interview. “But if you’re somebody from a Midwestern state, a fairly conservative state, it’s probably not going to be helpful.”

While Obama’s endorsement was praised by gay rights advocacy groups, lawmakers from the Democratic Party’s moderate wing have mostly reiterated their opposition to gay marriage.

May 12, 2012 8:05 AM  
Anonymous obama's strong contrast said...

Mitt Romney delivering the commencement address at Liberty University on Saturday.

"The American culture promotes personal responsibility, the dignity of work, the value of education, the merit of service, devotion to a purpose greater than self, and, at the foundation, the pre-eminence of the family," Romney said. "As fundamental as these principles are, they may become topics of democratic debate. So it is today with the enduring institution of marriage. Marriage is a relationship between one man and one woman."

Romney's remarks were well-received at the Christian university in Lynchburg, Virginia. A senior Romney adviser told reporters Friday that Romney planned to use the speech to "mention the fact that marriage is an enduring institution which deserves to be defended."

Romney's comments came just days after President Barack Obama made news by becoming the first sitting president to announce his support for redefining marriage to encompass those who are attracted to same gender partners.

Obama told ABC's Robin Roberts, that "I think same sex couples should be able to get married."

After addressing marriage, Romney touched on the subject of religious freedom, which he said has "become a matter of debate."

"It strikes me as odd that the free exercise of religious faith is sometimes treated as a problem, something America is stuck with instead of blessed with," Romney said. "Perhaps religious conscience upsets the designs of those who feel that the highest wisdom and authority comes from government."

"There is no greater force for good in the nation than Christian conscience in action," Romney continued.

Ahead of Romney's address, the Obama campaign stressed that there is a "strong contrast" between the president and the presumptive Republican nominee when it comes to values that are important to religious Americans.

May 12, 2012 1:39 PM  
Anonymous ha-ha said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

May 12, 2012 1:41 PM  
Anonymous sailing....takes me away said...

NASHVILLE, Tenn, May 11 (Reuters) -

Tennessee teachers can no longer condone so-called "gateway sexual activity" such as touching genitals under a new law governing discussion about safe sexual behavior.

Governor Bill Haslam's office Friday confirmed that he had signed the bill.

"Kissing and hugging are the last stop before reaching Groin Central Station, so it's important to ban all the things that lead to the things that lead to sex," he said.

Proponents say the new law helps define the existing abstinence-only sex-education policy.

Under the law, Tennessee teachers could be disciplined and speakers from outside groups like Planned Parenthood could face fines of up to $500 for promoting or condoning "gateway sexual activities."

David Fowler, president of the Family Action Council of Tennessee, which pushed the bill, said it does not ban kissing or holding hands from discussion in sex ed classes. But he said it addresses the touching of certain "gateway body parts," including genitals, buttocks, breasts and the inner thigh.

The bill sailed through the legislative session, passing the Senate 28-1 and the House 68-23.

May 12, 2012 7:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rand Paul took a swipe at Obama's recent support of gay marriage on Friday, saying he "didn't think his views on marriage could get any gayer."

Speaking at an Iowa Faith & Freedom event on behalf of his father Ron Paul's Republican presidential campaign, the GOP senator mocked Obama's announcement that he had concluded "same sex couples should be able to get married."

“Call me cynical, but I didn’t think his views on marriage could get any gayer,” Paul said, according to Kathie Obradovich of the Des Moines Register.

May 13, 2012 8:47 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

good news:

if Romney wins, TTFers can move to Cuba:

HAVANA -- The daughter of Cuban President Raul Castro said during a rousing gay rights march Saturday that her father advocated eliminating sexual discrimination, and reiterated her own hope the country would soon legalize same sex marriage

Mariela Castro, a noted gay rights advocate and head of Cuba's National Center for Sex Education, also repeated her praise for U.S. President Barack Obama's public remarks in favor of same sex marriage, saying the American leader's words "have great value because of the influence they might have" on others.

Still, she said Obama needed to back his words with action. While the U.S. president voiced support for same sex marriage, there were no plans in the U.S. to get behind federal legislation to mandate states to recognize such unions.

Castro's comments came during a colorful march by 400 advocates through the sweltering streets of the capital. The event is linked to the International Day Against Homophobia on May 17. Participants, including transvestites and transgender people, sang and danced in a conga line.

May 13, 2012 8:50 AM  
Anonymous let the chips fall as they may,,,yay! said...

Newsweek is celebrating President Obama's endorsement of same-sex marriage on this week's cover, an image of which it released on Sunday.

The cover features an image of Obama looking quite angelic with a rainbow-colored halo above his head (or a "gaylo"). The image accompanies the issue's cover story, written by Andrew Sullivan, titled "The First Gay President."

In his cover story, Sullivan argues that Obama's announcement has been years in the making. He also writes that the President has much in common with the gay community. “He had to discover his black identity and then reconcile it with his white family, just as gays discover their homosexual identity and then have to reconcile it with their heterosexual family," Sullivan writes.

Following news of Obama's endorsement, Sullivan wrote about the significance of the president's announcement. "Today Obama did more than make a logical step. He let go of fear," Sullivan wrote. "He is clearly prepared to let the political chips fall as they may."

May 13, 2012 1:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon, let me point out that opposing marriage equality is a losing tactic for Republicans in the long run, where the long run starts well before November. They may win over the fringe, like you and Rand Paul, but Americans are reasonable and fair-minded, and once this issue is examined in the sunlight there won't be any controversy. Your view will be like endorsing racial segregation now.

May 13, 2012 1:14 PM  
Anonymous this is gonna be fun said...

that's actually a fantasy you're having when not even one state's electorate has approved the nutty idea of eliminating marriage and replacing it with something that includes gay partners

Obama will now win California, New York and Maryland

it will be a toss-up in Illinois

everything else is lost

Barney Frank, head of the gays in America, is trying to help Obama out with women, who have been the victims of 80% of the jobs lost under Obama's "watch"

won't work

women know Barney Frank doesn't like them and Obama doesn't care if they're unemployed

WASHINGTON -- Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) lit into Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) on Sunday, when both appeared on ABC's "This Week."

The show started off civilly, with Frank responding to host George Stephanopoulos' questions about the adverse political implications of President Barack Obama's endorsement of gay marriage. But when Blackburn answered the same questions by pivoting to a statistic about women losing jobs under Obama, Frank responded with intense anger.

"This is a good political science lesson for people on what political parties' talking points are," Frank said. "My colleague Ms. Blackburn has been instructed to talk about the economics first, and while I would prefer to answer your questions, I do have to note that this Republican talking point that women have lost jobs -- the job losses came about because of the terrible recession that nonregulation in the economy brought about under George Bush."

"Oh I have to correct that," Blackburn interrupted. "That is incorrect information."

"George, what are the rules here?" Frank responded. From there, Blackburn repeatedly tried to talk over Frank's rebuttal of her point, with Stephanopoulos intervening to maintain coherent audio.

Blackburn had noted that nearly 858,000 women have lost their jobs under Obama. While private sector jobs have been growing under Obama, jobs for women have been down sharply.

Things got even more heated when Stephanopoulos shifted the topic of conversation to J.P. Morgan's recent $2 billion loss on a big derivatives trade gone wrong, and its implications for the policies enacted under the 2010 Wall Street reform bill.

"Bear in mind, the Dodd-Frank bill -- 2,300 pages, they've already had 400 rulemaking sessions and this is where you have so much regulation, you can't see the forest for the trees," Blackburn said.

"That's just nonsense," Frank interjected.

"It is not nonsense, Barney. And I think what we want to do is make certain that as we look at this, that we don't enshrine this too-big-to-fail."

That comment incensed Frank, who noted that Blackburn and all of her House Republican colleagues had voted against Dodd-Frank entirely, and that House Republicans were now trying to repeal the specific regulations on derivatives.

May 13, 2012 2:00 PM  
Anonymous Major Endorsement -- Shhhhhh said...

Former President George W. Bush endorsed Mitt Romney on Tuesday, reports ABC News.

"I'm for Mitt Romney," he said to ABC News as an elevator closed on him following a speech in Washington, D.C.

Bush joins his father, mother and brother in endorsing the former Massachusetts governor.

"I haven't met with President George W. Bush. We speak from time to time," said Romney in March when asked about a possible endorsement.

The Associated Press also noted that the 43rd president could end up being a liability:

"While largely unspoken, both sides acknowledge that Republicans would be best served by not reminding voters of the Bush legacy of gaping budget deficits, two wars and record low approval ratings. His eight-year presidency has merited no more than a fleeting reference from Romney and his rivals in debates, campaign stops and interviews."

May 15, 2012 9:46 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home