Comments (15) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   oldlegodad said, about 1 year ago

   obamaboy will fix it

2. 

   HUMPHRIES said, about 1 year ago

   As time will tell …

3. 

   RussellNash said, about 1 year ago

   Oldlegodad: I don’t think there’s really much Obama can do about it. It’s a state’s issue thing.

   Good news though is that the original ban passed 62-38 and this one only passed 52-48. The peoples’ minds are changing on this issue and I think that’s the way to let it go. If the government pushes, people will naturally push back. But as people meet more and more gays and find out they’re just normal folk, their opinions will change naturally.

   It’s stupid that gays have to wait, but the wait will pay off.

4. 

   Dale Hopson said, about 1 year ago

   Oldegodad71, Obama will be the next president, not turn into God!

5. 

   oldlegodad said, about 1 year ago

   People that I know that voted for him, think he already is, poor benighted souls that they are.

6. 

   boq said, about 1 year ago

   and there’s no comparison, mr. dennis prager?

7. 

   Corosive Frog said, about 1 year ago

   No one expected Obama to be like a god. Just a president.

8. 

   Patricia Klemme said, about 1 year ago

   Thanks from one who marched for black civil rights in the 60’s and 70’s, one who is still waiting for the dignity of my own civil rights in the 21st century. God bless you.

9. 

   lalas said, about 1 year ago

   Well Lego… we’re not your friends.

   We voted for Obama knowing he was not some kind of Messiah. We did however know he would be a MUCH better president than W or McSame.

10. 

    1MadMan said, about 1 year ago

    Prop 8 went down in flames so I am a little curious about the gay community voter turn-out. That proposition should never have passed.

11. 

    lalas said, about 1 year ago

    1MM – my understanding (as a non-CA) is the wording was pretty messed up. And that the Mormon church tried to create a lot of confusion about it as well.

    I’m sure you can count on the gay voter turnout to be pretty high.

12. 

    DALLASDAN said, about 1 year ago

    Sad when two oppresed minorities turn on each other, they’ve fallen into the WASP trap.

13. 

    curiosity1 said, about 1 year ago

    The recognition of the suppression and oppression of a persecuted minority should not be a states’ rights issue. Let us remember that the end of slavery did not come about through states’ rights. Women’s suffrage did not come about via states’ rights. The end of anti-miscegenation laws did not come about by states’ rights.

    That having been said, that individual states have made these steps in advance of the federal government (not just with regard to marriage-simply being gay can get you fired without recourse in 30 states) gives impetus to petitioning the high court that the oppression/suppression of the minority in question is not a gross universality.

    People love to decry “Activist Judges”, but I remind one and all, that one of the key roles of the Judiciary is in fact to place a check against the power of the popular (but not necessarily just) majority.

    I am hopeful that individual states in the U.S.A. are moving in a direction of including gays and lesbians as full, equal citizens even as others relegate us to second class status, and that the forward momentum of inclusiveness will eventually prompt the federal courts to protect that inclusion, no differently than it has for other minorities.

    I would also like to mention that at the point when the Supreme Court overturned the legitimacy of anti-miscegenation, it was in fact supported popularly by the vast majority of the population (roughly 3/4). That popular support did not make it right to prohibit mixed marriages then, and no percentage makes it right to prohibit same sex marriage today.

14. 

    lalas said, about 1 year ago

    C1 –
    Well put. I resent the Constitutionalization of bigotry. The thought of TAKING AWAY rights in a document that is supposed to be about liberty is revolting.

15. 

    motivemagus said, about 1 year ago

    To curiosity1’s point, the Founders also worried about the “tyranny of the majority.” Supreme Court justices were appointed for life specifically so that they could use their consciences as their guide, not votes. And of course we have yet to ratify the ERA, thanks to as empty-headed a campaign effort as any in recent history.