Obama's stance on Prop. 8

On MTV, Barack Obama tried to explain why he opposes gay marriage but also is opposed Proposition 8:

Obama told MTV he believes marriage is "between a man and a woman" and that he is "not in favor of gay marriage."  At the same time, Obama reiterated his opposition to Proposition 8, the California ballot measure that would eliminate the right to same-sex marriage that the state's Supreme Court recently recognized.

"I've stated my opposition to this. I think it's unnecessary," Obama told MTV. "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage. But when you start playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that's not what America's about."

San Francisco Chronicle columnists Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross sum up the hopes of the pro- and anti-Prop. 8 camps this way: "The pro-same-sexers are betting on the coattails of a big sympathetic turnout generated by Barack Obama's run for the presidency. Democratic tracking polls show that 7 out of 10 Obama voters are ready to vote "no" on the proposed constitutional amendment the marriages. The anti-same-sex-marriage campaign is betting on something that may be just as powerful: a last-minute "Sunday surge" of ministers campaigning from the pulpit."

That factor appeared to play a role in 2000 when voters passed Proposition 22, which defined marriage as only between a man and a woman.

The campaign also has kept law enforcement busy.

-- Shelby Grad

Photo: Los Angeles Times

Comments

[Randy]

As in most issues Obama's natural instinct is to have it both ways. He has exhibited his true character and this is the clearest example. His expects us to allow him to redefine the English language as president. Bill Clinton did the same thing when he talked about Monica Lewinsky. Character counts!

[AlexT]

Well, at least Mr. Obama got half of it right.

"Equal protection does not apply here. Interracial marriage, which I strongly support, is very different from same-sex "marriage." Race is an immutable characteristic.... Homosexuality is very different. There is no gay gene. There is no accepted scientific evidence that homosexuality is immutable. This fact was acknowledged by our state Supreme Court in its May marriage opinion. Many African American civil rights leaders are legitimately upset because they believe the homosexual community has improperly hijacked the civil rights movement." (Dean R. Broyles, president of the Western Center for Law and Policy)

"This is much bigger than just a question of whether or not society should be more tolerant of the homosexual lifestyle. Over past years we have seen unrelenting pressure from advocates of that lifestyle to accept as normal what is not normal, and to characterize those who disagree as narrow-minded, bigoted and unreasonable. Such advocates are quick to demand freedom of speech and thought for themselves, but equally quick to criticize those with a different view and, if possible, to silence them by applying labels like 'homophobic'.... This is more than a social issue — ultimately it may be a test of our most basic religious freedoms to teach what we know our Father in Heaven wants us to teach." (Dallin H. Oaks)

I am voting YES on Prop 8

http://yes-on-prop8.blogspot.com/

[Tim]

What is wrong with our Society?

Oppose Gay marriage, but allow legal gay marriage in California.
Oppose Killing, but allow legal abortion
Oppose Terrorism, but determine to withdrew our troop
Oppose lying, but lie to the public??

Guess what can be next?
Oppose using drugs, but make legal of cocaine?
Oppose Crime, but make legal of robbery?
Oppose War, but start using force and create World War???
I can really see that coming....

American should not support Obama who lied in front of your face.

[RM]

I am not gay, nor am I religious in any way, so whats the fuss? Prop 8 doesn't cost taxpayers a dime, doesn't infringe on your rights, and doesn't really effect anything you do personally. So why does anyone care. I don't. Its a human thing, I may not be gay, but if you choose to be gay, and you live with someone as a life partner, isn't it only fair to offer the same benefits as marriage to them?

I swear, no wonder everyone's moving out of Cali, no one even says hi to anyone here anymore, this is the most unpleasant place on earth. As long as your BMWs are washed and your drive thru Starbucks is open you are cool. But somehow all of the sudden we seem to care about stuff that doesn't even matter to us personally.

Wake up people, its coming, change. You cant hide from it for long, it was a close race, and next time it will pass, its a matter of time. And if your worried about your kids learning about it at school, you must be blind. Its already on TV and in our society. I think you are just mad because you probably have a gay relative somewhere in your family.

Farm animals now have more rights than humans in CA

[Lewis]

I am not a christian, I am not a Muslim, I am not a Jew or a member of any religion, I am a minority, I want to get married. Marriage is a sacrament based on religious archetypes and founded on thousands of years of social unity. Should I be able to get married? I am not genetically different from anyone else, i have no medical reason for not being a Christian, or any orther religion, I have different views from almost all of you. I am allowed to get Married despite these differences, however Gay couples who only differ in these same ways are not. I understand that while i am opposed to many of your religious mandates i am marrying a woman and so am able to, however my religion for instance could make me marry someone different, someone disabled only, someone of a different race or markedly different age, these are all allowed yet marrying another man is not. I wonder how this would be viewed had one of the three major dogmatic religions embraced and endorced same sex love and mariages, i severely doubt this would ever have been a problem. So the federal state is happy that homosexuality is a state of being in the USA but the religions arent happy about giving their names to this community. One thing i find prudent however is that homosexuality is older than all three religions and has been found and proved not only in Greek times, Alexander the Great being the most impressive find, but earlier aswel. So tis community has basis earlier than religion, yet is under physical bindings by these religions. To revert to the earlier example, i am of a diffderent faith, i would get married in my faiths church why should your religions dictate whether or not i may marry the person i choose, i am certain that if a Islamic priest said that two christians could not marry in a christian church there would be outrage, not only this but physical outbursts, which even though a huge break from the christian constitution of thou shall not kill and treat otrhers as you wish to be treated would then be allowed. So in cases like these the bible is a loose scripture but on the smaller passages regarding intra sexual marriages cannot under any circumstances be altered. I understand there are other matters involved in the proposition such as the legal trails of churches who forgo committing the services and this is one area i believe is not wanted by either side of the argument, however the other pivotal matter of education in schools i have firm beliefs on. Children could be taught about Homosexuality and unions between same sex people in schools. This is an outrage to many people, but i fail to see why, yes homosexuality lessons would be mandatory, however so are lessons on other religions, it doesnt mean that children then blindly follow every one of them. If you are against homosexuality or at least are fearful of homosexual children, teaching them about it will not force them into it, in cases where you are against homosexuality full stop they could also be but rather just on blind ignorant bases on educated ones, if you dont want a gay child you hope for the percentages to be in your favour, thin k about it every gay person was born by two straight people and as the majority of the worlds populace is straight were constantly under heterosexual viewpoints, they still ended up gay, and should your child be homosexual if they are taught about it in school they will be able to live with it better, you may say you would leave your children if they were gay but i have never met a mother who wouldnt want, however their child was inclined or thaught to be severely disadvantaged and undertaught about themselves and how to live the lifestyle they have grown into. The proposition has passed and now children are taught that homosexuals are second class on marriage and in terms of love, those who are gay now have less hope of finding love and those who arent have more amunition and are now more ignorant than ever to others. Those who voted yes wanted marriage and future of their kids to be sacred, now they have this ammendment they have lowered the happiness and knowledge of the next generation. I as a human being hope that they are happy with the choice they made, but hope that the next generation arent and realise this mistake, to change the law back and reenter the path to peace, love and enlightenment.