Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Barack Obama said Friday that his Christian beliefs dictate that marriage should be between a man and a woman, although he supports civil unions that give legal rights to gay and lesbian couples.
Republican candidate Alan Keyes accused Obama of trying to have it both ways on the issue.
"I think what we are seeing on this issue is deceit,'' said Keyes, who has made his opposition to gay marriage a cornerstone of his campaign. "He is deceiving the voters.''
Throughout the campaign, Obama has said that he opposes gay marriage but is in favor of civil unions.
During a taping of WBBM-AM's "At Issue,'' he was asked his personal views on gay marriage.
"I'm a Christian, and so although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman,'' Obama said.
But the Democratic state senator added that he does not understand people who say gay marriage somehow threatens the sanctity of marriage as an institution.
I honestly doubt this is going to harm him. If anything he gets points with me for being open, honest and direct about it. Keyes can suck a rusty bayonet with that line.
There's no way that whackjob Keyes is going to win this election. Obama can probably say whatever he wants.
BoTM / JL / MM / HAB / VRWC / Horseman
I'm studying for the CPA exam. Have a nice summer, and if you're down just sit back and realize that Joe is off somewhere, doing much worse than you are.
It should be noted that Keyes' stance is to deny homosexuals union rights alltogether.
Mayabird is my girlfriend
Justice League:BotM:MM:SDnet City Watch:Cybertron's Finest "Well then, science is bullshit. "
-revprez, with yet another brilliant rebuttal.
Wow, Obama learned fast to compromise his beliefs early in his career so when he runs for a higher office he doesn't have to do the 'John Kerry Shuffle ' to distance himself from his record.
"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.” -Tom Clancy
Col. Crackpot wrote:Wow, Obama learned fast to compromise his beliefs early in his career so when he runs for a higher office he doesn't have to do the 'John Kerry Shuffle ' to distance himself from his record.
Well They have been having a FIt at DU about this.. They eat their young over there
Sudden power is apt to be insolent, sudden liberty saucy; that behaves best which has grown gradually.
It can basically be boiled down to 'okay, religiously, marriage = man + woman. Fine. Let the religions decided what they want within themselves, and let same-sex couples of that same rights under the LAW"
Who cares what the union is called, as long as it has the same inheret rights and protection.
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.
It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
It can basically be boiled down to 'okay, religiously, marriage = man + woman. Fine. Let the religions decided what they want within themselves, and let same-sex couples of that same rights under the LAW"
Who cares what the union is called, as long as it has the same inheret rights and protection.
Except that it's still, if nothing else, the same seperate but equal shit that got struck down long ago. Unless you think Plessy vs Fergusson should be allowed to stand?
And on that note, as is the case for all these seperate but eqal deals civil unions carry far, far less protections and rights. The typical civil union is a pale shell of what a real marriage is, at least legally. It's only thanks to the spin doctoring of the middle and left that they're be dishonestly treated as anything near a real marriage. Because they most certainly are not.
Politican X makes a comment on an issue that is kind of wishy-washy and tailor designed not to indanger his career by being controversial.
People that are in the other party: "He's being wishy washy on the issue!"
People that are in the same party: "He's got his career to think about, he can't afford to be controversial right now!"
It doesn't matter whether Politican X is a Democrat, Republican, or Independent, it's all the same.
"Show me an angel and I will paint you one." - Gustav Courbet
"Quetzalcoatl, plumed serpent of the Aztecs... you are a pussy." - Stephen Colbert
"Really, I'm jealous of how much smarter than me he is. I'm not an expert on anything and he's an expert on things he knows nothing about." - Me, concerning a bullshitter
It can basically be boiled down to 'okay, religiously, marriage = man + woman. Fine. Let the religions decided what they want within themselves, and let same-sex couples of that same rights under the LAW"
Who cares what the union is called, as long as it has the same inheret rights and protection.
Good idea except one thing: "Separate but Equal" has been shown to not be equal at all, whether enforced by government or by the groups themselves.
Wicked Pilot wrote:I'm not sure what the big deal here is. If you want a candidate who agrees 100% with you on every issue, then you need to run yourself.
Ayup! That's why in thirty years, I'm running for POTUS!
The only way we are likely to get legally sanctioned homosexual marriage in America any time soon, is incrimentally. Obama isn't going far enough, but he is moving things closer to where they should be.
The Excellent Prismatic Spray. For when you absolutely, positively must kill a motherfucker. Accept no substitutions. Contact a magician of the later Aeons for details. Some conditions may apply.
Wicked Pilot wrote:I'm not sure what the big deal here is. If you want a candidate who agrees 100% with you on every issue, then you need to run yourself.
student gov senator, right here.
This day is Fantastic!
Myers Briggs: ENTJ
Political Compass: -3/-6 DOOMerWoW
"I really hate it when the guy you were pegging as Mr. Worst Case starts saying, "Oh, I was wrong, it's going to be much worse." " - Adrian Laguna
Wicked Pilot wrote:I'm not sure what the big deal here is. If you want a candidate who agrees 100% with you on every issue, then you need to run yourself.
This isn't some tax code technicality or budget discrepancy. This isn't just any issue, it's as black and white as they come. There is a very clear right and wrong answer. You can't have it both ways either.
Wicked Pilot wrote:I'm not sure what the big deal here is. If you want a candidate who agrees 100% with you on every issue, then you need to run yourself.
This isn't some tax code technicality or budget discrepancy. This isn't just any issue, it's as black and white as they come. There is a very clear right and wrong answer.
You do of course realize that those on the other side say the same thing, right?
Wicked Pilot wrote:I'm not sure what the big deal here is. If you want a candidate who agrees 100% with you on every issue, then you need to run yourself.
This isn't some tax code technicality or budget discrepancy. This isn't just any issue, it's as black and white as they come. There is a very clear right and wrong answer. You can't have it both ways either.
Lazy.. on this we agree... He cant have it both ways....
Sudden power is apt to be insolent, sudden liberty saucy; that behaves best which has grown gradually.
Here's the big question then for everyone going 'seperate but equal doesn't work'. (Which I tend to agree with from a legal stand point)
What if he's talking about making them legally equal, and removing the term marriage from the law? i.e all current marriages become legal civil unions, and you can call it whatever you want for your religious beliefs?
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.
It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
Solauren wrote:Here's the big question then for everyone going 'seperate but equal doesn't work'. (Which I tend to agree with from a legal stand point)
What if he's talking about making them legally equal, and removing the term marriage from the law? i.e all current marriages become legal civil unions, and you can call it whatever you want for your religious beliefs?
That will never happen.... IMHO what Obama is doing is just Trying to be the DEM poster boy.. but still not legalizing Gay Marriage... That doesnt work in National elections.. I understand this is a state election.. but the party wants him to go national..
Sudden power is apt to be insolent, sudden liberty saucy; that behaves best which has grown gradually.
Solauren wrote:What if he's talking about making them legally equal, and removing the term marriage from the law? i.e all current marriages become legal civil unions, and you can call it whatever you want for your religious beliefs?
That will never happen.... IMHO what Obama is doing is just Trying to be the DEM poster boy.. but still not legalizing Gay Marriage... That doesnt work in National elections.. I understand this is a state election.. but the party wants him to go national..
It's very encouraging that supporting civil unions has become the moderate position among the Democrats on gay marriage. Half a loaf is better than none, and it's amazing how quickly civil unions have gathered support.
