What BHO should say about the CA gay marriage decision....

[musiclawyer]

I understand that BHO has gone on record as being against gay marriage. I disagree but fine. What he really needs to say to not let this become a manufactured diversion is:

"Although I personally think marriage should be between a man and a women out of tradition, there being alternatives for the states to formalize such unions, lawful gay marriage is a welcome development for millions of Americans, and I am happy for those Californians who will benefit from the court's ruling."

Get out in front of it. Done. Period. He remains consistent but progressive. It can't hurt him. That would be my advice if I was counseling him.

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. "He remains consistent but progressive" ?

[TexasObserver]

2. His best argument is to say it's up to each state, and each state has a supreme court

Each state has a supreme court to interpret its constitution and laws, and that court usually decides such issues. That keeps state control of the issue, rather than making it a federal issue, either for or against same sex marriage.

[musiclawyer]

4. That's a good answer too

But it's not an answer to a "how do you feel about it" question. You KNOW the media is going to persist. I'd rather him address it now and be done with it.... if they ask of course. I'm assuming they will.

[TexasObserver]

7. Yes, but he's a law professor, and he shows that in the way he addresses issues

I understand what you're saying, but I think he will identify the legal issues and address it as a state court case, taken to the state's highest appellate court. He thereby does not alter his official position, but he also doesn't disparage a state that has approved gay marriage.

I sometimes wish he'd be more personal in his approach to things, but his analytical, almost unemotional, approach to problems suggests he will fall back on his tried and true method: objective assessment, by the numbers.

[satireV]

10. If Obama was POTUS

he could NEVER support states rights like that. he would HAVE to support centralized or federal powers or else become toothless.

He would thus have his AG fight AGAINST the Cali decision if it ever appeared before the USSC.

This is bad issue for Obama to become a right winger on. Watching him send in his AG to fight against gay marriage being accepted by the states would be really bad for his extreme left wing agenda.

[Terran]

25. I don't believe it is a states' rights issue

because the states may not restrict rights that are guaranteed by the US Constitution; and the SCOTUS has already made a ruling (the Texas sodomy law ruling) that says there is no basis on which to treat gay people differently from straight people under the law. If the California decision came to the SCOTUS, they really would have no basis to rule any other way than to affirm it.

[satireV]

5. Uh no.

That's a right wing extreme argument. States rights v central rights.

Besides. the full faith and credit clause trumps any state which has a law that prohibits gay marriages.

IOW If a state recognizes a het marriage from another state, then they must recognize a gay marriage from another state if they are both legal in the other state.


Of course Roberts, Scalia, and thomas will ignore the constitution if it ever comes up.

[cali]

8. no. it's not always a right wing argument. Take Oregon's suicide law

Do you support it? If so, you're supporting state's rights, or as I prefer to think of it, human rights. Sometimes states are ahead of the Federal Gov't when it comes to human and civil rights.

[msallied]

I agree completely.

We are a nation of nations, plain and simple. It's only when it comes to issues that inhibit civil liberties and constitutional rights that the the feds should step in. If not, then the south would probably still be owning slaves and seating blacks in the back of the bus.

[satireV]

13. And women would not have the vote.

[satireV]

12. I support the Oregon Assisted Suicide law a billion % :)

I see it and the gay marriage laws as similar. These new types of laws restrict governmental powers over individuals and recognize, (not grant) civil liberties that have always existed.

It is a right wing argument to be against either of those laws. if Obama or clinton or ANY candidate is against assisted suicide and/or gay marriages laws he is staking out a right wing pro-government position and not a liberal one.

and most certainly.. states many times are ahead of the fed in recognizing rights. Like when, what was it Montana or one of the Dakotas recognized the right to vote by women... like a decade before suffrage was federally enacted

[ieoeja]

15. Conservatives are afraid of commas.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."


They always stop at the last comma in the 10th Amendment. In fact, when we compare Democrats and Republicans on the 10th Amendment, we find that Democrats are far more consistent in supporting it.

When Democrats use federal power to overrule the states, they have most famously done so to protect the rights of the people, e.g. segregation. The federal gov't in this instance is acting as the arbitrator in determining States vs Civil rights in accordance with the 10th Amendment.

When Republicans use federal power to overrule the states, they have most famously done so to remove the rights of the people, e.g. medical marijuana. The federal gov't in this instance is acting in opposition of both States and Civil rights, putting them in violation of the 10th Amendment.

[ieoeja]

11. Full faith and credit does permit limitations by the federal government.

And in this case the federal government did place that limitation in there through DOMA (Defense Of Marriage Act).

Fortunately, *this* election we finally have a nominee who endorses repealing DOMA. Now, if we can just get our congress-critters to pass a repeal next year....

[newmajority]

16. Actually, that has been his position all along

He favors civil unions with legal equality to hetero marriage, but he believes it should be left to the states, as opposed to a national decision.

And it's honestly the best approach. California was eventually going to approve gay marriage. Utah probably never will. So it would make absolutely no sense for California to be held up by what Utah wants.

Of course there is also the issue of one state recognizing the validity of a marriage performed elsewhere. Say for example a gay married couple is driving through Utah and get injured in a car wreck. One of them is injured seriously, and consent is required to perform surgery. The couple was legally married in CA, but there's no legal gay marriage in Utah. Should the state of Utah be required to accept the validity of their marriage in order for the spouse to give legal consent for the surgery (assuming the partner is unconscious and cannot do so him or herself.

This may be the biggest sticking point in the state by state basis - whether your rights are "portable" to the states which choose not to allow marriage.

It would be easier if people would just get over their fucking bigotry, of course. But one victory at a time, right?

[TexasObserver]

22. the full faith and credit clause should protect the rights of travelers

In the circumstance where a gay couple goes to Utah to visit, or even if they move there. Full faith and credit should require them to accept the marriage of the other state, even if they don't sanction gay marriage themselves.

I'd love to have universally accepted gay marriage, but it is unrealistic to expect that to happen in the near term. It is the goal, however.

[leftofcool]

3. On the eve of an election, it might be

best to not address it at all. The GOP is already trying to paint him as an unpatriotic librul, so maybe saying nothing would be a good idea.

[Sgent]

6. eh....

Obama's the most progressive candidate on the subject of gay rights, that's why I'm voting for him. But I don't want him to mobilize the RW against him even moreso than they are now.

[msallied]

9. I think that's a good thing to say.

There are some things in which states rights are important, but not when it comes to discrimination and disenfranchising a whole segment of the population. I'd like for Obama to overturn DOMA immediately upon taking office, one of many policies that made Bill Clinton one of the best Republican Presidents alive.

[Marrah_G]

14. "So are you two Married? " ...... "No, we are Civil Unioned"

See how fucking Dumb that sounds?

My child has the right to someday say "Yes, I am married" As an American citizen she is entitled to the same rights as I am. As you are.

Once upon a time slavery was a tradition, backed up by religion.

Once upon a time interracial marriage was considered a sin and again it broke with Tradition.

When Traditions are wrong, when Traditions make one person less then equal, then those Traditions deserve to go the way of the dinosaur.

[newmajority]

23. Traditions and legal documents are two different things

Gay couples can have a "marriage ceremony" now, provided they know a minister of whatever faith willing to do so. It's the legal document that's the issue.

The interest of the state should be legal equality for all, so they should issue the exact same license (and all the rights that come with it) regardless of the genders of the parties involved. And the traditional ceremonies should be left to the discretion of the religious denominations.

Separation of Church and State. Just as God and Thomas Jefferson intended it.

[goletian]

17. he understands that the word, marriage is all that holds it back.

a majority would support civil unions, which would be the exact same thing under a different name. once thats done, the fights pretty much over. no one is going to say you cant call yourself a married gay couple.

[BigDDem]

18. Wait, I thought he was Mr Authentic, all about honesty,

telling it like it is, new politics and all that.
He's against gay marriage, he should say he's against it.

[msallied]

19. Wow. You lack the ability to understand nuance!

Are you a Republican?

[BigDDem]

24. and you lack the ability to see recognize a phony

Happy Friday!

[MaineDem]

20. Just keep religion out of it and it's a no-brainer

Let churches do what they feel is right. Let the law be what the states decide is right. Done deal.

[AZBlue]

21. Why do you use the "H" in his initials?

And don't say Hillary is HRC - she uses her maiden name professionally, so it's not the same.

So, what's your reason?