Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Obama has made himself a huge hypocrite by deciding to have Rick Warren give the invocation speech at his inauguration (this is a guy who strongly pushed for Propostion 8 and has compared gays to polygamists and pedophiles). Obama promised all those who voted for him that he would stand up for equal rights for gays, and this is a huge slap in the face to all those who supported him. I ask that you please sign this petition to help ensure equal rights for all Americans, no matter what their sexual orientation is.
Rick Warren: "I'm opposed to having a brother and sister be together and calling that marriage. I'm opposed to an older guy marrying a child and calling that marriage. I'm opposed to one guy having a multiple wives and calling that marriage.
Interviewer: "Do you think those are equivalent to gays getting married?"
Rick Warren: "Oh, I do"
Charlie
Last Edit: Dec 19, 2008 18:55:53 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
Personally, I'm not that bothered by the gay marriage rights. I'm not saying it isn't right, because I do feel anyone has the right to marry whoever they want, but marriage is the foundation of this country (and most countries) and I understand when people fight against it. I just think their is much more important issues on the table right now than gay rights, but TBH I really didn't even think this should've been an issue to begin with, but here we are.
Well considering what a huge issue Prop 8 is right now, and that the fight over it is continuing in the courts, this kinda is a big issue to alot of people.
Post by chicojuarz on Dec 20, 2008 15:38:14 GMT -5
Obama has never supported gay marriage. While he doesnt have any plans to try and get an amendment in the Constitution he has said that he believes marriage is between a man and a woman. Rick Warren is devisive but Obama isnt being a hypocrite when he has always agreed with this point.
And dont think I'm supporting Prop 8. There is no such thing as separate but equal and Prop 8 to me is just a form of condoned bigotry.
Gay marriage is a HUGE issue right now! Sure, it's not the biggest issue, but it's definitely still on people's minds. Aruawhere - and please don't take this as a personal attack - but perhaps the whole gay marriage debacle doesn't bother you because it has no bearing on your life.
Although I'm an Obama supporter, one thing that really irks me about the President-elect is that throughout his campaign, he continually dodged the question on gay marriage by saying it should be up to the individual states to decide. I know he kind of had to do this to win over the swing states, but it still disappoints me.
Politicians should not be legislating on matters of the heart, and if you think that sounds corny, well, so be it. No religious institution is going to be forced to perform a gay marriage if it conflicts with their doctrine. But why aren't gays and lesbians allowed to be wed in a non-denominational ceremony, i.e. by a judge? Who are these lawmakers and politicians to say that their love is not good enough for one of humanity's most revered institutions? And why are they not entitled to all the added benefits of marriage, such as tax cuts, insurance, hospital visits, etc., etc.?
Despite what Fox News might have you believe, it doesn't threaten the sanctity of traditional marriage. Gay marriage changes nothing for the husband and wife who have been together for years. So why aren't they allowed the same chance at permanency and happiness that we are, that chance to be a little less alone in this world, to have someone to grow old with? The ban on gay marriage is our society's most blatant breach of the separation of church and state, and it sickens me. If the Republicans are really so keen on limited government, then they would get rid of these age-old discriminatory blue laws. Any ban on gay marriage goes against the fundamentals of our democracy - that all men are created equal, the we all have the right to the pursuit of happiness, and that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.
Everyone talks about how this will redefine marriage - well, yeah, but marriage has been redefined time and time again in this country. Polygamy used to be legal, divorce used to be very rare, and perhaps most shockingly, in 1967, 16 states had laws that forbade inter-racial marriage. Yeah, that's right - just 40-something years ago, our future President's parents couldn't have gotten married in nearly a third of the states in this country. Think about that for a moment.
I'll get off my soapbox now. If you actually read all this, thank you.
It's a good point that Obama isn't for gay marriage. I think it's also important to point out Obama hasn't appointed Warren to a policy making position. Obama has also made it clear that there is a place in his administration for opposing views.
It would be a terrible mistake to embrace liberal monothinking and exclusion of diverse viewpoints. Bush made the mistake of surrounding himself with syncopants. Obama is not foolish enough to do the same
Gay marriage is a HUGE issue right now! Sure, it's not the biggest issue, but it's definitely still on people's minds. Aruawhere - and please don't take this as a personal attack - but perhaps the whole gay marriage debacle doesn't bother you because it has no bearing on your life.
Although I'm an Obama supporter, one thing that really irks me about the President-elect is that throughout his campaign, he continually dodged the question on gay marriage by saying it should be up to the individual states to decide. I know he kind of had to do this to win over the swing states, but it still disappoints me.
Politicians should not be legislating on matters of the heart, and if you think that sounds corny, well, so be it. No religious institution is going to be forced to perform a gay marriage if it conflicts with their doctrine. But why aren't gays and lesbians allowed to be wed in a non-denominational ceremony, i.e. by a judge? Who are these lawmakers and politicians to say that their love is not good enough for one of humanity's most revered institutions? And why are they not entitled to all the added benefits of marriage, such as tax cuts, insurance, hospital visits, etc., etc.?
Despite what Fox News might have you believe, it doesn't threaten the sanctity of traditional marriage. Gay marriage changes nothing for the husband and wife who have been together for years. So why aren't they allowed the same chance at permanency and happiness that we are, that chance to be a little less alone in this world, to have someone to grow old with? The ban on gay marriage is our society's most blatant breach of the separation of church and state, and it sickens me. If the Republicans are really so keen on limited government, then they would get rid of these age-old discriminatory blue laws. Any ban on gay marriage goes against the fundamentals of our democracy - that all men are created equal, the we all have the right to the pursuit of happiness, and that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.
Everyone talks about how this will redefine marriage - well, yeah, but marriage has been redefined time and time again in this country. Polygamy used to be legal, divorce used to be very rare, and perhaps most shockingly, in 1967, 16 states had laws that forbade inter-racial marriage. Yeah, that's right - just 40-something years ago, our future President's parents couldn't have gotten married in nearly a third of the states in this country. Think about that for a moment.
I'll get off my soapbox now. If you actually read all this, thank you.
I'm 100% with you on this. I didn't mean to say it wasn't a big issue. What I meant is just tough to explain. My opinion on the matter is that a gay couple even getting married should not have even been an issue. I'm only 21, so up until a few years ago I just always assumed gays were allowed to get married. It's just ridiculous to me that someone even stopped to think, "Man, we really have to STOP gays from getting married!" I just meant it wasn't a big issue to ME, because I don't see the difference between a regular couple and a gay couple getting marriage rights. I wasn't trying to say it's not a big issue in the country.
As for understanding the opposition on this matter (anti-gay marriage), what I mean is not the christian radicals saying it will ruin the sanctity<sp?> of marriage, but that the institution of marriage is what this country is founded upon. Now let me get into further detail on this...
This country's economy is based on marriage. Two people get married, buy a house, buy new furniture, and buy a new car. Now here's where it get's tricky. Have kids, buy baby clothes, buy a crib, buy forumla, and buy diapers. Gay couples physically cannot have kids together. Sure, if they were able to marry, they could adopt children. But we go down a slippery slope with that one. It just gets a bit too complicated for the simple minded, and I understand how that can scare people. That's all
I still do believe that there are greater issues to deal with right now rather than gay marriage. Instead of squabbling about prop 8, what about the countless homeless living in our streets? That's such a general example, but I just think the money we all spend on court cases that take forever to decide could be spent on much better things.
It's a good point that Obama isn't for gay marriage. I think it's also important to point out Obama hasn't appointed Warren to a policy making position. Obama has also made it clear that there is a place in his administration for opposing views.
It would be a terrible mistake to embrace liberal monothinking and exclusion of diverse viewpoints. Bush made the mistake of surrounding himself with syncopants. Obama is not foolish enough to do the same
Opposing views are one thing. Bigotry is another. I'm just really tired of all this "one America", let's accept everyone's opinion bullhonkey. Warren is a grade A bigot. He pushed for Propostion 8, a bill that excludes Americans fundamental rights based on their sexual orientation. He has compared gay marriage to polygamy, incest, and pedophilia (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZMf9mPB_nE). The guy is a bigot in the purest sense and form, and by allowing him to give the invocation speech, Obama is stating that bigotry and hatred are okay
Last Edit: Dec 20, 2008 18:38:31 GMT -5 by Deleted - Back to Top
It's a good point that Obama isn't for gay marriage. I think it's also important to point out Obama hasn't appointed Warren to a policy making position. Obama has also made it clear that there is a place in his administration for opposing views.
It would be a terrible mistake to embrace liberal monothinking and exclusion of diverse viewpoints. Bush made the mistake of surrounding himself with syncopants. Obama is not foolish enough to do the same
I agree with this. Obama has not appointed Warren to any policy making decision. Therefore its difficult for me to see what the big deal is. You're mad that a guy you don't like is going to make a speech? That's what this is all about? Lets focus on real issues and not get sidetracked on who is going to read a poem at inauguration. Clearly this move is an olive branch to the evangelical/right wingers who thought he was a muslim. And essentially, its meaningless as it has nothing to do with policy or how he will act as president.
I'm just saying that its not a such a big deal to as to sign a petition. If you're going to take up a cause, take up something that actually makes a difference. Is anyone even going to give a crap about who spoke at the inauguration 6 months from now? Of course not. Its not like he's going to even going to mention gay people in his speech. Don't get so worked up over the little stuff that you miss the big picture.
While I don't think debate is a bad thing, I started this thread to get the word out about the petition, not to debate whether or not this is a "worthy cause". It might not matter to some of you, but it does matter to a lot of people. Here's the link:
im sure ill get smited, but what the hell (and not trying to hate on obama, as some people will probably think im trying to bash him)...however, with time, obama will piss more people off for one reason or another...right now, a lot of the hispanic population is pissed at obama for the fact that he picked hilary for whatever position, over bill richardson who easily had more experience than hilary for that said position...muslims are upset at the fact that obama picked emmanuel, a jew, for whatever position...and finally, unions are upset with obama for not helping their cause in regards to the auto bailout
i know that these points are debatable, but this is what i have picked up not listening to the liberal-biased media (obviously, im referring to fox radio as to what i listen to during the day)
also, im sure people will point out to the fact that i have no idea what positions people were appointed to...in all honesty, i could care less as to who obama picks for his team...however, i will hold them accountable for mistakes, and praise them when good is done
on the topic of this thread, i personally feel a gay couple should have the same rights as a non-gay couple
finally, to jack234, as to your comment about republicans and limited government...getting rid of something like gay marriage goes against being conservative
Post by strumntheguitar on Dec 23, 2008 2:20:16 GMT -5
^^heh, while I must say that of course fox news or fox radio is going to be stressing and focusing on people disappointed and frustrated with Obama thus far, seriously he hasn't even spent one second in office yet so everyone should probably hush their criticisms here.
I definitely agree with you though jigawig in the sense that people will be disappointed in Obama. It will have nothing to do with how he serves as president and what he does or does not accomplish. It's just that he has the expectations of the savior of the nation. If he doesn't completely resolve the nations economy and bring world peace and a cure for AIDS people will criticize. It's a shame really, but I don't know if any other president has had higher expectations before even beginning their term
^^^believe me, im not criticizing (yet)...im merely pointing out who he has upset...and strum, foxnews and fox radio are not only pointing out the bad, they are showing the other side of the coin on the issues (two points, i forget which major tv network aired it, but there was a program showcasing events that led up to 9/11, and the clintons called the network demanding that it be edited to not show bill clinton as "passing the buck" in regards to the GOLDEN opportunity to take out bin laden...also, look at how biden reacted when asked questions about marxism and spreading the wealth during an interview in florida)
off topic, can anyone please explain to me the purpose of "the fairness doctrine"...the media is for the most part liberal (tv, periodicals, etc)...how is silencing conservative radio hosts (or in the words of democrats minute for minute equality for both parties) fair? from what i understand, the doctrine would only affect radio, and that is the only place in all media where republicans MAY have a wider audience than democrats
I have to admit that I see both sides of the Warren issue. Let me start by saying that I disagree with just about everything Warren is about. BUT, there is a right in this country for everyone to be peacably heard, whether or not you agree with them. I think that is what Obama is doing. Sending a message to the right-wing conservatives that he will listen to their side.
As far as Gay Rights go, I'm all for them. I have numerous friends who deserve the same rights as myself and my wife. How that destroys the sanctity of marriage, where the ceremony is performed by a judge, is beyond me. At the root of the issues is these people are afraid of things they don't understand, things that threaten the way they were raised, things they don't want to explain to their children....CHANGE, basically.
