Obama about to announce support of marriage rights for all?

**Galen Sevinne** · 05-09-2012, 01:36 PM

There are some rumors spreading that Obama is about to announce a full endorsement of marriage rights for all today during a 1:30 interview. Anything short of this would be a disappointment and coming the day after the travesty in North Carolina would be a big deal.

Let's go Obama, here is a chance to walk the walk.

**NCRAVEN** · 05-09-2012, 01:55 PM

Originally Posted by Galen Sevinne

There are some rumors spreading that Obama is about to announce a full endorsement of marriage rights for all today during a 1:30 interview. Anything short of this would be a disappointment and coming the day after the travesty in North Carolina would be a big deal.

Let's go Obama, here is a chance to walk the walk.

I voted against the amendment because I don't believe the government should be in the marriage business at all. The worst part of the amendment is it does away with legal unions for any group of people.

If he comes out in full support of gay marriage it would surprise me a little, but not much, he needs to rally his base.

**CptJesus** · 05-09-2012, 02:32 PM

100 percent agree about government in marriage. However as long as tax breaks and protections ate provided, everyone should have a fair shot.

Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2

**NCRAVEN** · 05-09-2012, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by CptJesus

100 percent agree about government in marriage. However as long as tax breaks and protections ate provided, everyone should have a fair shot.

Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2

Pretty much.

And if you want to call it something different, fine, whatever. But the same privileges need to be given to everyone.

**NCRAVEN** · 05-09-2012, 03:02 PM

So he is now for gay marriage.

Good for him, just wondering, does this mean "he was against it before he was for it"

**ActualSpamBot** · 05-09-2012, 03:09 PM

NC... Did you mean to say that he IS for gay marriage?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76103.html <Article dated 3pm today.

Originally Posted by The Prez from said article

“I’ve just 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.”

“I’ve stood on the side of broader equality for the LGBT community. I hestitated on gay marriage in part because I thought civil unions would be sufficient, I was sensitive to the fact that for a lot of people, the word ‘marriage’ evokes very powerful traditions, religious beliefs.”

**NCRAVEN** · 05-09-2012, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by ActualSpamBot

NC... Did you mean to say that he IS for gay marriage?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76103.html <Article dated 3pm today.

Yes I did, sorry. I meant to say now and not "not"

**Galen Sevinne** · 05-09-2012, 05:24 PM

You guys are wrong. You can get legally "married" by a judge without ever stepping into a church or talking with a person of god. The idea that the word "married" is somehow exclusive to church, god or anything religious is simply incorrect.

Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2

**NCRAVEN** · 05-09-2012, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by Galen Sevinne

You guys are wrong. You can get legally "married" by a judge without ever stepping into a church or talking with a person of god. The idea that the word "married" is somehow exclusive to church, god or anything religious is simply incorrect.

Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2

We're are not saying that is how it IS, saying that is how it should be. But before governments starting issuing marriage licenses, where did you go to get married?

But how about you address the leadership of switching stances for contributions.

**Galen Sevinne** · 05-09-2012, 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

We're are not saying that is how it IS, saying that is how it should be. But before governments starting issuing marriage licenses, where did you go to get married?

But how about you address the leadership of switching stances for contributions.

So you think I shouldn't be able to be married? So basically your point is that religion and in this case, christian religion, should regulate all marriages? Or should i have acted like i think there is a god for an hour and endured all the suggestions that we should act good because there is this guy up on a cloud somewhere watching? Or should i go to a judge for whom i respect, and have her marry us in a secular ceremony? Christianity doesn't have have exclusive rights to the word marriage. Truthfully, i am considering changing the wording of our union to exlude "marriage" until everyone can be married equally because I think it is wrong for me to assume a title because of some heterosexual privilege. In fact i would like to start a movement for all people who believe in equality of people to divorce and be "civilly unioned". In time the word marriage will become associated with the bigotry of the good ol christian homophobics. Then they can have the word until it fades into atrophy.

Obama risks losing votes over this. The gay community knows he has always supported marriage equality and there is nothing romney will verbalize that will be more appealing than Obama's position prior to his interview today. Obama risks losing african american vote of those who have problems with gays. It is certainly more potential to lose votes than gain. Of course, the leadership he has shown to take a controversial but correct position might work for him since romney hasnt taken a postion on anything ever that lasted for more than an election cycle.

Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2

**HoustonRaven** · 05-09-2012, 07:22 PM

Yawn.

Marriage shouldn't even be something the government sanctions. Gay, straight or otherwise. If two consenting adults want to marry, then they should be allowed without government intrusion or approval.

It's a cheap political trick and the timing of it couldn't be more suspect.

**NCRAVEN** · 05-09-2012, 07:28 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Yawn.

Marriage shouldn't even be something the government sanctions. Gay, straight or otherwise. If two consenting adults want to marry, then they should be allowed without government intrusion or approval.

It's a cheap political trick and the timing of it couldn't be more suspect.

Exactly!

The war on women, the dog-gate - pick anything, it's to be about anything other than his record and the economy.