In what supporters have hailed as a historic moment in civil rights history, Mr Obama reversed his position on the controversial social issue just six months before the November election
"I've just concluded, 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," Mr Obama said in an interview with ABC News America.
In Australia, there is legislation before Federal Parliament to allow same-sex marriage, but Julia Gillard says her opposition to it will not change despite Mr Obama's remarks.
"I've just concluded, 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," Mr Obama said in an interview with ABC News America.
now if only the support of the president meant something when it came to civil rights and law changes.
Why does anyone get married? You don't need to. Nothing wrong with just being with someone.
I think it's more to do with marital rights then "oh look honey, we are married now yay!" Don't you get taxed as one when married or something to that extent?
In America you get taxed more if you're not married. Here you can tick the 'Defacto' box, over there you can't.
Hospital visitation and their private (work paid) 'Partner' health care is another big reason why they want same sex marriage recognised.
the only thing he found out recently that changed his mind is public opinion has swung in favor of gay marriage
he, like all politicians, will never really say what he thinks/feels/means to say, he will say whatever will guarantee him the best chances in his next election
good on him though, even if he's just pandering, it needed to be done
next target: marijuana
I always thought it weird people hating on a Polly that changes with the public. Isn't that their job?
It's when the Polly changes against the public opinion, after being voted in with that key specific issue in play, that I find it annoyng.
It's good that it's happened, and I hope that he honestly has changed his views based on his experiences etc and not for political gain or party pressure.
Either way though it's a positive move for sure, only if Julia wasn't so backwards!
Maybe he just found out his daughter(s) is(are) gay?
Possibly, but on the surface Joe Biden (VP) seems to have forced the issue by announcing that he's for gay marriage, and he came to this view while watching reruns of Will and Grace.
That's a really good discussion Dazhel, thanks for that. I agree with his opinions that the root of all marriages is that you love and care for each other, so why can't lesbians, gays or heterosexuals enjoy that positive nature?
i really don't think you've followed the issue in Australia AT ALL have you?
About the only good thing she did do was equalize marriage and non marriage partnerships. she didn't allow gay marriage, but she did make the marriage label worthless.
Part of me think that it should be kept traditional....the other part of me thinks that marriage is fucked these days so who cares if 2 dudes want to get hitched. It does not affect me personally so why not.
Reverend Roger Munson, from the Uniting Church in Canberra, said the Australian Christian Lobby's opposition to gay marriage did not represent the stance of all Christians.
"Jesus preached the message of inclusion not exclusion," he said.
Sydney Baptist pastor Mike Hercock said he was part of a congregation that had shifted on the issue.
"We're particularly concerned by the dehumanising arguments of the Australian Christian Lobby," he said.
"There's constant fear-mongering among some Christian conservatives and they're trying to degrade what is essentially a desire for monogamy, fidelity and the family unit."
Reverend Gary Bouma, from the Anglican Church in Melbourne, said the Marriage Act was discriminatory.
"It's dehumanising to tell someone their love isn't right," he said.
Part of me think that it should be kept traditional....
What do you mean traditional though? Like in the Bible where you could force two of your slaves to get married? or where you could rape a woman, pay her father fifty shekels and she would have to marry you for life.
To me they should change the law to make it so the government only recognises the term "civil union" and everyone that is now married is changed over to a civil union but can still call themselves married if they wish it just won't mean a damn thing.
It's all about the legalities of having a formally recognised union.
things like death, illness, taxes, inheritance, etc.
EG. if 1 gay is in a serious accident, his/her partner has no recognised legal rights to do anything like, authorise meds/surgery, turn off life support, donate organs, and if the parent of that injured one is really anti gay then they can also stop them even visiting their partner in hospital.
no real logical reason i can see why govt's just don't let it happen. it's really only the militant christians and other god botherers that are so anti this. who really gives a fuck. it doesn't impact me just let them do it.
Seems to be a lot of unknowns and misinformation ITT.
EG. if 1 gay is in a serious accident, his/her partner has no recognised legal rights to do anything like, authorise meds/surgery, turn off life support, donate organs, and if the parent of that injured one is really anti gay then they can also stop them even visiting their partner in hospital.
Not really true. You can sign a Power of Attorney just like anyone else which gives you these rights.
taxes
pls explain? I can't see anything that might be a reason to be married for tax purposes in Australia.
inheritance
You can write a will like anyone else as well. Just don't die intestate. Pretty easy.
So far I see no good reasons.
I would like to see marriage removed altogether, but that will never happen.
a) So they can corrupt civilisation and bring forth fire and brimstone onto their urban localities from the heavens.
-or-
b) Because heterosexual couples have enjoyed the social recognition that being in a marriage brings for many centuries.
I want gay marriage to be legal because I want to have the same rights as heterosexual people. I don't want to feel like a second class citizen because of my sexuality.
I find this is to discriminatory and I feel that people who don't want it to happen - people who typically DO have the right to get married should have to justify why I shouldn't more than I should argue to have it!
Not really true. You can sign a Power of Attorney just like anyone else which gives you these rights.
yes. along with an advanced health directive. all still challengable by relatives. being a legal spouse by law gives you much more say in these matters if challenged.
pls explain? I can't see anything that might be a reason to be married for tax purposes in Australia
Dependent spouse tax offset. don't forget they can have kids also so there's all that stuff.
You can write a will like anyone else as well. Just don't die intestate. Pretty easy.
see point one
i admit i was generalising but was just trying to convey that being married, under our govt laws holds a lot of sway. not saying this is right but to deny gay people this right seems ridiculous when it really doesn't affect anyone.
You could ask what's wrong with this too, 'the coloureds' clearly have equal water after all -
Though I don't have any interest in getting married, telling people that they are lesser based on some minority trait alone is a disgusting uncivilized thing. We may as well tell people like me with green eyes that we can't get married, since we're much less prevalent, but there's no institutionalised hate against us.
The definition of marriage has been massively rewritten so many times just in the last century, let alone the last few thousand years, allowing divorce, interracial marriage, etc. The only reason to be against inclusionism is hatred or political pandering.
Well homosexual people just deserve the same rights as heterosexual people. I'm sure you guys all have gay friends or family members. Why would you want to deny them equal rights?
i personally don't care about gay marriage. They can do whatever they want. I just find it funny that the left think we should be free to have gay marriage but then in the same breath steals money from us for wealth redistribution. a token freedom like gay marriage is easy, but economic freedom, the left hate that.
Well all clubs need to be financed, what if you get more freedom by paying for schools, getting doctors, engineers, scientists, all working to improve your freedom from disease, from dangerous structures, from asteroids, etc.
Would you agree though infi that it really depends on how people arrive at that wealth, for how much you care? e.g. It would after all be domination in the old feudal sense if you were born living under a prince, only have the option of working for the prince and paying the prince rent since the prince owns all the land, yet all that the prince did was be born to a throne. There is your concern over earned wealth being stripped, presuming that we all earn our place in life in a sort of karmic way, but then there are also (in my eyes, justified) concerns about oppression and exploitation by non-earned wealth, look out how wealth has divided so spectacularly in recent years, and presumably at how the super rich have been strangled by society... Or is there actually an element of that in reverse? Remember that the religious cry oppression too, when they are simply losing their theocracy which oppresses others.
I think gay marriage and the distribution of wealth are probably very different :)
I also think you'll find there are many people who agree in gay marriage but are very strong supporters of hardcore capitalism, or 'economic freedom' as you put it.
I also think you'll find there are many people who agree in gay marriage but are very strong supporters of hardcore capitalism, or 'economic freedom' as you put it.
Yeah, this is what I wanted to point out, this can be a right position (if you are for liberty), and so can other takes on wealth.
Scooter... uh, my response includes concerns like that. But you go from "I think infi was talking about" followed by "you misunderstood him again", speculation to fact... Anyway, the main tell is that you never have a go at infi for his initial OT rant - right wingers rushing to poorly masked idealism defence with inconsistently applied rage. ;)
yup really obes.
obviously i meant political sleigh of hand... which is what it is.
it is a social issue that will distract people's attention & allow politicians to gain/lose favour with various groups but what does it have to do with the running of the country? nothing.
Here's the thing. The idea of two men kissing in public and rubbing bums kind of grosses me out. Luckily gay men don't tromp around the streets kissing each other and touching bums. Lesbians however, I thoroughly endorse public displays of affection, provided they fit a certain physical criteria. How come I only ever see Ugly lesbians :<....
So they can get married and adopt kids and do whatever the fuck they want, it has nothing to do with me. Who are we to deny them the right. As long as they are held to the same laws and principles as hetrosexual couples when adopting children. If they are fit to be parents they can be, just like anyone else.
Why is there even an issue about this? put it to vote and gays will b able to marry, instead of letting some red haired logan slut make the decision for the country. All these cunts in charge are so old school and dont know wtf is going on these days.
I would rather just let gays marry than hear people whinging about it day after day, week after week on the news... How does it impact anyone else but the 2 individuals getting married?
I think it's more likely a pre-emptive strike due to the fact that he has been moonlighting as a massuese* and John Travolta is about to start naming names, Heidi Fleuse* styles.
Also, agreed with infi.
*sp?
**Edit - this Opera Mini browser is giving out about as much grief as Ike Turner. :/
I can't stand homosexuals and their sympathizers trying to normalize their choice.
Quite frankly, I think there should be a law against it
'sympathizers'??? Seriously?
Also, I think you'll find that it's pretty well accepted these days that it's not a choice, in the same way that being that being heterosexual isn't a choice.
I can't stand homosexuals and their sympathizers trying to normalize their choice.
Quite frankly, I think there should be a law against it
There was a law against it, right up until around 1990 when our fair state came to the enlightened conclusion that ultimately it wasn't that much of a big deal if two dudes as consensual adults wanted to do things to each others bums.
the only thing he found out recently that changed his mind is public opinion has swung in favor of gay marriage
he, like all politicians, will never really say what he thinks/feels/means to say, he will say whatever will guarantee him the best chances in his next election
In other words, represent your constituency? I.e., Democracy.
AndrewB is a troll or a fuckhead. I hope the former.
I just dont like it hwne they use it a as an excuse.
I remember I had a run in with a fellow worker back when i worked at woolies.
We didnt get along but it had nothing to do with him being gay. at this time i didn't even know.
So he has gone and spread the word that im some fag hating dragon. when the fact is i didnt even know, nor cared that he was gay, he was just a fuckhead.
I heard a rumour that Obama was breastfed until 8 and now look what's going on - it's resulted in the evolution of a smoking, health freak, humorous and jovial, minority accepting youthful president?! What would happen if we really amped it up and stretched the age to 14 - now that's something to draw shoppers' attention if I ever saw it. :) Also, nice draw on the hidden ace of spades from an oppression empathiser.
It's clear she has some form of mental illness, or engaging in some Joanquin Phoenix inspired performance art.
In either case it's mostly sad rather than funny.
If I said I was batman, I would be deemed insane but if I say I am a girl I am completely sane
Because you can prove it with science. An MRI scan can show that the person's brain looks like a female brain, not like a male brain. Good luck proving you have Batman's brain.
PM
WWW
