Comments made by Vice President Biden sent the White House PR machine into overdrive today and inadvertently pushed the president's stance on marriage equality back into the spotlight.
Biden told NBC's Meet The Press he's "absolutely comfortable" with same-sex couples being granted the same rights as heterosexual ones. Today, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan also publicly voiced his support of marriage equality on MSNBC's Morning Joe.
President Obama has stayed famously vague on the issue, saying his position is "evolving."
Leave a Comment:
The time to speak out against any equality, which denying gay people the same right to marry as the rest of us does, is always NOW! As Elie Wiesel said- " There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustices, But there should never be a time when we fail to protest!" That goes for our elected officials too!
We all know his personal stance on the issue of same-sex marriage but that doesn't mean this will be his public stance. He's repealed DADT and he's told his administration not to support DOMA ... that should be enough for anyone.
It is truly sad we have to choose between two candidates for POTUS who oppose equal rights for all people
I agree that it's sad that a candidate (our President, for example) has to feel constricted in expressing his or her views in order to win an election. However, the stakes are very high for all of us. Where do you think we'd be if McCain had been elected. I believe the planet would be trying to survive radiation poisoning. And what do you think will happen if Romney is elected.
I don't believe our President opposes equal rights for anyone. Nor do I oppose equal rights; I've been an activist since the late 60's. I personally think that he were stronger on every issue he campaigned on, he'd find the kind of support he wants. I also can understand the hesitations.
The average person, not in political office, cannot begin to understand the pressures on President Obama. Although I've been unhappy with some of his decisions, I think we should all cut him some slack and make sure someone like Romney isn't allow to rubber stamp the extremist agenda of the Republicans. I, for one, take the consequences of that agenda very seriously.
I hope that everyone who opposes the aspirations of the far right should get involved today in making sure that doesn't happen, particularly in light of the massively funded voter suppression campaign.
I am thankful for the president's support to repeal DADT and refusing to defend DOMA. Sadly though, it is not enough. Here in North Carolina, those of us in the gay community are facing further rejection of who we are if the constitutional amendment is approved in tomorrow's primary voting. I don't understand who or what Obama is afraid of, and I believe it is time for him to show the same courage as Vice President Biden by firmly standing for justice and equality
The President could come out and say he is for it, that does not mean the measure will pass in North Carolina. As the Rev said if voters rights and many other rights from the 60's were up for vote they probably would not pass. Look at what the southern states are doing to voters rights and that is an amendment that was passed.
Until recently I was of the mind that this POTUS could not and should not go out on a limb for marriage equality until his second term. But provided he actually IS for marriage equality (and I would like to believe he is), I no longer believe he has anything to lose electorally by being forthright about his views, and potentially a lot to gain with his base...like me.
Yikes, this poll is a squeaker!
Can you enlighten me as to what "squeaker" means in this context?
I thought he was a Constitutional Scholar, why does he need to "evolve" on the issue? Because it's election time and we must tread lightly, it's all about votes, not what's right.
There is no room for ambiguity on this issue. One would never accept an "evolving" position on miscegenation laws, why is marriage equality any different.
Mr President, get on the right side of history or be remembered a coward.
That's exactly right, Mr Lerner! Anything less than equality is unacceptable. In a modern country, equal rights should be a given and not be considered a special accomplishment or a courageous move.
I really don't understand all this praise of Obama for repealing DADT. Canada already did this 19 years before the USA. So, that's nothing out of the ordinary. The USA merely caught up with the rest of the Western World on this issue. It's hardly something to be proud of, but rather embarrassing that it took so f*cking long.
It's totally pathetic that coming out in favour of marriage equality is still politically risky in the USA! In a modern country, NOT supporting marriage equality should be "political suicide". Obama is such a coward, because he wants to play it safe and cares more about power than about principles. This fact alone makes me want him to lose the next election.
I would never vote for someone who doesn't support marriage equality. If a politician already fails at picking the right side when it comes to such a basic issue as marriage equality, then I have to conclude that this politician won't be able either to find the right solutions to more difficult and complex problems. Such a politician has a major lack of judgement and is therefore ineligible.
Marriage being a legal confirmation of the union of a Man and Woman for the purposes of reproducing children in a supportive househod is the right side of history, for all the aboration of homosexual union of the modrn "me first", hedonistic Western Civilization, David!
Marriage being a legal confirmation of the union of a Man and Woman for the purposes of reproducing children in a supportive househod is the right side of history,
According to your logic
Seriously? You want to condition marriage on raising children?
Marriage and family are two totally different things. Unmarried people can and do have children. Married people don't always have children.
all the aboration of homosexual union of the modrn "me first", hedonistic Western Civilization
So, you think that being in a same-sex relationship is selfish? Well, it's just as selfish as being in a different-sex relationship. Also, reproduction is a very selfish thing to do, because nobody asks the future children if they want to be born. People have children, because THEY want to have them. All in all, I would say that the selfishness of people doesn't depend on their sexual orientation.
Dorothea
I'm 100% in favor of gay marriage. The gay divorce reality shows will be a riot.
I can't wait to see Lance sue Bryce because he painted the walls chartreuse instead of fuschia.
This president has done more for gay rights than any president in history but instead of supporting him on what he has done you ridicule him for not doing more, he doesn't seem cowardly to me LGBT community is seeming selfish and I am someone who supports same sex marriage. He hasn't did anything for the black community but you don't hear us complaining about it. When try to force someone to come on a position chances are you won't like the position they come out for.We support our President for the good he has done and the good he will do in the future.
you ridicule him for not doing more [...] the LGBT community is seeming selfish
Yeah, right! Minority groups who want equal rights are sooo selfish. On the contrary: NOT supporting equal rights for minority groups is selfish. Obama is selfish, because he doesn't stand up for what is right. Imagine Lincoln didn't stand up for what is right. Then Obama probably couldn't be president now.
From 1863 to 1964 blacks had no rights Lincoln freed the slaves he didn't give them rights! Black people fought for those rights and Obama has given rights to LGBT that no other president even thought of doing there's no comparison of the two. When you been fighting for over a hundred years then you can speak on who is selfish and who isn't
Obama has given rights to LGBT that no other president even thought of doing.
As African American, Obama must understand the importance of EQUAL rights. I expect him to know that separate is never equal. That's why it's twice as morally reprehensible that he's (officially) in favour of legal segregation: marriage for different-sex couples and civil unions for same-sex couples.
When you been fighting for over a hundred years then you can speak on who is selfish and who isn't
So, you want LGB people to suffer as much as African Americans before you "graciously" grant them equal rights? That's not exactly an enlightened stance. That's nasty, immature and ... selfish. Formerly oppressed people shouldn't turn into oppressors.
Besides, LGB people have NEVER had equal rights. So, they have been oppressed for a much longer time than African Americans.
"Obama has given rights to LGBT"
DT
Obama isn't big enough to give "rights" to anyone
3.5% of adults in the US identify as being gay, lesbian, or bisexual. That's a pretty small group of voters for Obama to appeal to, given that the larger minorities of blacks and latinos are not sympathetic to the "marriage equality" argument. Who should he risk staying away from the polls on a reaction to a small minority based social issue?
The liberal or "progressive" media is not doing him a service in his reelection campaign by hyping this least important of the social issues! Even if "sex sells" their products!
Marriage equality isn't about sex, it's about love. Morality and civil rights have nothing to do with votes, majorities or minorities; this is not a "minority based social issue," it's a human rights issue. One should not play politics with human rights.
Who should he risk staying away from the polls on a reaction to a small minority based social issue?
Civil rights for minority groups shouldn't have to win a popularity contest. Politicians should stand up for what is right, not for what is popular.
Problem is in our pluristic society here Doreathea we have minorities who are confirmed polygamists, pedophiles, animal lovers, and all kinds of folks that are standing in line to get their individual share of "civil rights".
Here is how it works under our constitutional federal government. The powers not specified to be under the purview of the federal governments three branches of government are reserved to the separate states. And the right of the state to regulate marriage is not at question.
The regulation of mariage is determined by the body politic of each state as they see fit. Pure and simple.
we have minorities who are confirmed polygamists, pedophiles, animal lovers, and all kinds of folks that are standing in line to get their individual share of "civil rights".
Keith, do you seriously equate homosexuality with paedophilia and bestiality? Don't you see that there is a difference between consensual acts and non-consensual acts? Or don't you WANT to see the difference?
As far as polygamy is concerned, I wouldn't mind if it were legal, because it happens consensually.
The regulation of marriage is determined by the body politic of each state as they see fit.
Didn't the legalisation of interracial marriage happen on the federal level?
Also, please try to get my name right. Thanks.
I really don't know quite what to say on this one. It is very easy to say "Yes, now is the time," but with all due respect to Mr Biden, no one pays all that much attention to what the Vice President says. The President, however, is in the middle of a campaign and as such is walking a very high tightrope with no net on several issues, not the least of which is marriage equality. And it is far from impossible that if he did come out in our favor it would create a backlash that would propel Mitt Romney into the White House.
My personal opinion is that President Obama fully intends to push for marriage equality; his record on LGBT rights bears this out. But he is also not a fool; he is a savvy politician who is well aware of the possible consequences to those who might be on the fence come Election Day.
I am forty-nine years old; my husband is fifty-five. We've been waiting for equality for decades; a few more months won't kill us.
And to everyone who is bad-mouthing this President on this issue: if you screw this up for the rest of us and stay home on Election Day this year like so many *progressives* did in 2010, it's on you this time; people like me have been waiting and fighting for longer than some of you have been alive.
if you screw this up for the rest of us and stay home on Election Day this year like so many *progressives* did in 2010, it's on you this time
No, it's not fault of the progressives. It's the fault of Obama. Guess why progressives stayed at home in 2010? Because there was no progressive to vote for! Progressives can't vote for Obama without betraying their principles, e.g. supporting equal rights for gay people, respecting human rights of Muslims.
Now wasn't the time in North Carplina, as that state became the 33rd of 34 to to vote against gay marriage "rights", by a decisive 58% to 42% margin.
Now perhaps we can get back to discussing what to do about the faltering economy, hifg persistant unemployment, a non existamt energy policy, a weakened defense posture.
Serious issues all before us.
@Keith Longey Just as an FYI the last time NC voted to ammend its constitution concerning marriage was to ban interracial marriage; that decisive margin supported discrimination and perpetuated inequalities as well reflecting it was "not the time" for them to do the right thing then either apparently. Is there a right time to do the wrong thing? Also something for you to think about ---- this amendment very much effects individuals (both heterosexuals and same-sex couples) economics, with its passage eliminating health care, prescription drug coverage and other benefits for public employees and children receiving domestic partner benefits. I'll stop my ranting, but one more comment before I do ... "a weakened defense posture" --- are you serious?