Obama's Statement on Gay Marriage in 2006

[Trinity]

From Senator Obama's U.S. Senate Website:

Obama Statement on Vote Against Constitutional Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage

Wednesday, June 7, 2006

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Washington Contact: Tommy Vietor or Robert Gibbs, (202) 228-5511
Illinois Contact: Julian Green, (312) 886-3506
Date: June 7, 2006

Obama Statement on Vote Against Constitutional Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage

WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) today released the following statement outlining the reasons for his vote against a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage:

"This debate is a thinly-veiled attempt to break a consensus that is quietly being forged in this country. A consensus between Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, Red States and Blue States, that it's time for new leadership in this country - leadership that will stop dividing us, stop disappointing us, and start addressing the problems facing most Americans.

"I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been."

Open Letter by Obama 2008:

"As your President, I will use the bully pulpit to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws. I personally believe that civil unions represent the best way to secure that equal treatment. But I also believe that the federal government should not stand in the way of states that want to decide on their own how best to pursue equality for gay and lesbian couples — whether that means a domestic partnership, a civil union, or a civil marriage. Unlike Senator Clinton, I support the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)
– a position I have held since before arriving in the U.S. Senate. While some say we should repeal
only part of the law, I believe we should get rid of that statute altogether. Federal law should not
discriminate in any way against gay and lesbian couples, which is precisely what DOMA does


hmmm...in 2006, Obama believes it should be left up to the states but when running for president his position changes.


Clinton on DOMA: "I believe that DOMA served a very important purpose. I was one of the architects in the strategy against the Marriage Amendment to the constitution, and DOMA gave us a bright line to be able to hold back the votes that were building up to do what I consider to be absolutely abominable and that would be to amend the constitution to enshrine discrimination. I believe marriage should be left to the states. I support civil unions as I've said many times with full equality of benefits and so I think that DOMA appropriately put the responsibility in the states where it has historically belonged and I think you're beginning to see states take action. I think it's, I think part three of DOMA needs to be repealed because part three stands in the way of the full extension of federal benefits and I support that."

 

[HazelGod]

The only thing your post demonstrates is that you're a moron who lacks basic reading comprehension skills.

 

[joejack]

Who gives a shit about it? Will it solve any of our real problems? We are talking about the survival of our species, ladies and germs! We got too many homo sapiens on this planet. We are murdering our mother.

 

[deleted136887]

Who gives a shit about it? Will it solve any of our real problems? We are talking about the survival of our species, ladies and germs! We got too many homo sapiens on this planet. We are murdering our mother.

Man are you right. Who cares a toss? as long as Obama has the right money backing him, he be DA man!! He will NO DIFFERENT from any other candidate,. Just saw that PREACHER MAN telling it as it is on some sell-out TV show in India. Obama distanced himself from that very sharply.Da pearcherman tells the truth, Obama?Never forget that that the liberals got you guys into just about all the wars you ever been in, and the
GOP keeps on throwing money(which the usa realy has not any more, having blown it all on tax breaks for the rich and the so-called fight against the BAD GUY)

PS Clinton(the guy with the small dick, not his wife with REAL cock) is all over TV here.What a loser. Could he not have boned a chick with more class..... Oh I forget! I didna inhale, I do not know that woman,We never fucked up in Somalial, Live is great. PS you wanna buy some cheap property in whitewater?(there was no penetration)
:tongue:

 

[Trinity]

The only thing your post demonstrates is that you're a moron who lacks basic reading comprehension skills.

It is you HazelGod who lacks comprehension skills. Like before when you called bullsh*t and ended up with egg on your face.

IndustrialSize and others may want to know what Obama's position was in 2006 before Obama ran for president...that the states should decide. IndustrialSize has made several posts on this issue.

 

[dreamer20]

Why bring up this issue in which the President of the USA/ G.W.Bush attempted to have his religious based bigotry against gays written into the U.S. Constitution?

An issue which was discussed here:

http://www.lpsg.org/28492-not-over-yet-bush-senators.html

Excerpt:

June 5, 2006:CNN News:
"
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush and Senate conservatives renewed their battle Monday to ban same-sex marriage through a constitutional amendment that has a slim chance of passage.

After G.W.Bush proclaimed that "homosexuality is wrong" he made the following comments regarding the proposed amendment:

"I call on the Congress to pass this amendment, send it to the states for ratification, so we can take this issue out of the hands of overreaching judges and put it back where it belongs: in the hands of the American people," Bush said at the White House on Monday.
"When judges insist on imposing their arbitrary will on the people, the only alternative left to the people is an amendment to the Constitution: the only law a court cannot overturn," he said...

Obama: Votes Against Constitutional Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage:

Wednesday, June 7, 2006

WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) today released the following statement outlining the reasons for his vote against a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage:

"This debate is a thinly-veiled attempt to break a consensus that is quietly being forged in this country. A consensus between Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives,...that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been."

Senator Obama was among those who defeated this measure.

Note that this issue was about G.W.Bush etc. trying to use a Constitutional amendment to stop judges ruling in favor of civil unions, all of which were contrary to Bush's personal religious beliefs.

Obama is not opposed to civil unions.

Excerpt from his website:

Q & A: Obama answers questions at town meeting | U.S. Senator Barack Obama

Gay marriage - "I'm not in favor of gay marriage, but I <Obama> do support civil unions because our civic religion is based on not discriminating against people and on providing them their basic civil rights."

 

[B_Monster]

It is you HazelGod who lacks comprehension skills. Like before when you called bullsh*t and ended up with egg on your face.

IndustrialSize and others may want to know what Obama's position was in 2006 before Obama ran for president...that the states should decide. IndustrialSize has made several posts on this issue.

You go girl, :wink:

 

[joejack]

Man are you right. Who cares a toss? as long as Obama has the right money backing him, he be DA man!! He will NO DIFFERENT from any other candidate,. Just saw that PREACHER MAN telling it as it is on some sell-out TV show in India. Obama distanced himself from that very sharply.Da pearcherman tells the truth, Obama?Never forget that that the liberals got you guys into just about all the wars you ever been in, and the
GOP keeps on throwing money(which the usa realy has not any more, having blown it all on tax breaks for the rich and the so-called fight against the BAD GUY)

PS Clinton(the guy with the small dick, not his wife with REAL cock) is all over TV here.What a loser. Could he not have boned a chick with more class..... Oh I forget! I didna inhale, I do not know that woman,We never fucked up in Somalial, Live is great. PS you wanna buy some cheap property in whitewater?(there was no penetration)
:tongue:

We have a war now. Have you heard? It was based on the unadulterated bullshit of that famous liberal from Texas, George W. Bush. You for the war or agint' it? All else is bullshit.

 

[Trinity]

Why bring up this issue in which the President of the USA/ G.W.Bush attempted to have his religious based bigotry against gays written into the U.S. Constitution?

Senator Obama was among those who defeated this measure.

Note that this issue was about G.W.Bush etc. trying to use a Constitutional amendment to stop judges ruling in favor of civil unions which were contrary to Bush's personal religious beliefs.

Hillary Clinton voted "No" on the Amendment. Both Clinton and Obama helped to defeat the Amendment. This post is not about the Amendment. But here is where you have to be be a shrewed voter, at the time in 2006 Obama's position was that THE STATES SHOULD DECIDE on same sex marriage.

Only when Obama decided to run for president did he change his position. IndustrialSize has several posts on this issue.

 

[Trinity]

You go girl, :wink:

Aww, Mon :07:

 

[b.c.]

Why bring up this issue in which the President of the USA/ G.W.Bush attempted to have his religious based bigotry against gays written into the U.S. Constitution?

An issue which was discussed here:

http://www.lpsg.org/28492-not-over-yet-bush-senators.html

Excerpt:

June 5, 2006:CNN News:
"
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush and Senate conservatives renewed their battle Monday to ban same-sex marriage through a constitutional amendment that has a slim chance of passage.

After G.W.Bush proclaimed that "homosexuality is wrong" he made the following comments regarding the proposed amendment:

"I call on the Congress to pass this amendment, send it to the states for ratification, so we can take this issue out of the hands of overreaching judges and put it back where it belongs: in the hands of the American people," Bush said at the White House on Monday.
"When judges insist on imposing their arbitrary will on the people, the only alternative left to the people is an amendment to the Constitution: the only law a court cannot overturn," he said...









Senator Obama was among those who defeated this measure.

Note that this issue was about G.W.Bush etc. trying to use a Constitutional amendment to stop judges ruling in favor of civil unions, all of which were contrary to Bush's personal religious beliefs.

Obama is not opposed to civil unions.

Excerpt from his website:

Q & A: Obama answers questions at town meeting | U.S. Senator Barack Obama

Gay marriage - "I'm not in favor of gay marriage, but I <Obama> do support civil unions because our civic religion is based on not discriminating against people and on providing them their basic civil rights."

Why bring it up? Because this is Obama, not "G.W."... that's different.


"As it gets closer to "crunch" time, expect the racists (on both sides of the line) to "come out". The ones who know they are, the closet racists, and the "I'm not a racist but" crowd."

 

[dreamer20]

Bill Clinton signed the defense of marriage act into law Sept. 21, 1996.

Defense of Marriage Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

B. Obama became a U.S. Senate Representative for IL in 2004.

Note that Obama, when faced with the same-sex marriage ban proposal in 2006 voted against the discrimination that G.W.Bush and others wanted written into the Constitution.

Calling for the repeal of DOMA does not show a change of course for Obama, but again a similar action needed to remove a law that discriminates against gays.

 

[Trinity]

Bill Clinton signed the defense of marriage act into law Sept. 21, 1996.

Defense of Marriage Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

B. Obama became a U.S. Senate Representative for IL in 2004.

Note that Obama, when faced with the same-sex marriage ban proposal in 2006 voted against the discrimination that G.W.Bush and others wanted written into the Constitution.

Calling for the repeal of DOMA does not show a change of course for Obama, but again an action needed to remove a law that discriminates against gays.

Yes it does. The whole differentiation Obama attempts to make between himself and Sen. Clinton is that she only supports a partial repeal of DOMA which would keep the decision responsibilitywith the States while now he supports full repeal. Currently with DOMA in effect states such as Massachusetts as IndustrialSize has pointed out have enacted same-sex marriage laws.

Prior to running for President, Obama believed responsibility belonged with the states. More than that he believed:

"I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been."

 

[b.c.]

One may have personal beliefs on a subject (whether it be on race, religion, sexual preferences) that may be different from how he/she may legislate on behalf of other people's civil rights (in this case, the right to civil unions and personal choices as to who one wants to marry).

A person may also change their position on a issue based on newer perspectives and insights into the ramifications of that position (in this case weighing a state's right to legislate re. marriage vs. the civil rights of individuals whose rights would be denied as a result of unjust legislation).

I personally think more highly of someone who can alter and rethink his/her position on an issue than I do of someone who clings tenaciously to an outmoded concept, no matter how wrong he is proven to be.

BTW. What do you think John's position would be on the issue (or better still - that of his constituency)?

 

[Bbucko]

This is such a non-starter.

 

[D_Kaye Throttlebottom]

I'm not a racist - I'm just an oreo cookie, fuckwit.

 

[dong20]

BTW. What do you think John's position would be on the issue (or better still - that of his constituency)?

Mid 2004 - a proposed ban was 'un' Republican
Late 2006 - clearly and unequivocally against.
Spring 2007 - Clearly for (but, it turned to be a myspace hack).

I found this 'interesting' - a statement made by the late Jerry Falwell. Falwell was founder and President of Liberty University where Senator John McCain gave the commencement speech back in 2006.

AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals. To oppose it would be like an Israelite jumping in the Red Sea to save one of Pharaoh&#8217;s charioteers . . . AIDS is not just God&#8217;s punishment for homosexuals; it is God&#8217;s punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.
​

The above comes from a man McCain said it was an &#8220;honour&#8221; to have hosted him. Judging by his kind words after Falwell's death, after long being at odds, it seems they had a rapprochement.

So, by an extension of Trinity's tortuous logic, does Senator John McCain also believe AIDS is God&#8217;s punishment for homosexuality, or perhaps he's simply changed his mind?

I'm just asking.

 

[D_Kaye Throttlebottom]

Yes it does. The whole differentiation Obama attempts to make between himself and Sen. Clinton is that she only supports a partial repeal of DOMA which would keep the decision responsibilitywith the States while now he supports full repeal. Currently with DOMA in effect states such as Massachusetts as IndustrialSize has pointed out have enacted same-sex marriage laws.

Prior to running for President, Obama believed responsibility belonged with the states. More than that he believed:

"I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been."

Left to the states, because Heterosexual marriage is STATE issue, so likewise gay marriage is a state issue.

Heterosexuals don't apply for marriage licenses in a federal court to get married, it's a local jurisdiction/state matter. Every state has different rules for marriage -fees, and days to apply for license, blood tests, etc.

Obama made a distinction between his personal beliefs; versus what the law is and (heterosexual) marriage is not a federal issue, the DOMA would have to be repealed. So anything "protecting" or "banning" marriage is not determined by federal government, but at the sate level (see above).

Trinity, your argument is sensationalistic and completely distorted and you're doing it deliberately to press a button. It's not even a creative argument you've presented and it's been debated before.

Though Indy can defend himself.

 

[Bbucko]

Anyone who plans on "defending the Constitution" does him or herself a favor by reading it periodically:

Amendment X


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.

 

[hockeycock]

I don't see how the 2006 statement and the 2008 statement are at all contradictory. A constitutional amendment banning gay marriage would take away states' rights to decide what marriage is within their borders. The federal government has never had a hand in defining marriage - until 1996, when the so-called Defense of Marriage Act instructed all federal agencies (like the IRS) not to recognize same-sex marriages performed according to the laws of the several states (that's sec. three of DOMA).

If I understand the OP, the distinction is that a full repeal of DOMA would take away the ability of states to refuse to recognize gay marriages performed in other states (that's sec. two), whereas Hillary Clinton wants to continue to allow states to do so. While I guess requiring states to recognize other states' marriages under the Full Faith and Credit clause of the constitution can be interpreted as subversive of "states' rights," the Full Faith and Credit clause also requires state courts to enforce each others' judgments, and I don't hear anyone saying that that takes away states' rights to make their own laws. Anyway, the definition of marriage precedes the Full Faith and Credit question, and that definition has been, and always should be, made by state legislatures without the United States Congress sticking its snout into it. Obama has never said otherwise.