Obama Endorses Gay Marriage. Rest of World to Follow?

[Husker_x]

 

 

MEXICO CITY (AP) — President Barack Obama's announcement Wednesday that he supports gay marriage boosted the hopes of gay rights groups around the world that other leaders will follow his example, though opponents denounced his switch as a shameless appeal for votes.

Several countries, including Canada, Spain and Argentina, allow same-sex marriage, but far more countries ban it and dozens even prohibit consensual same-sex relations. Gay-rights groups hope Obama's views will inspire more change.

"This is incredibly important, it's excellent news. The United States is a global leader on everything, and that includes gay rights," said Julio Moreira, president of the Rio de Janeiro-based Arco-Iris gay rights group. "This will force other nations like Brazil to move forward with more progressive policies."

Vatican and other religious officials didn't comment, but political leaders and others opposed to gay marriage excoriated Obama. In particular, politicians tied to Pentecostal and Catholic churches have spoken out strongly against same-sex marriage in Latin America.

"Barack Obama is an ethical man and a philosophically confused man," said Peruvian congresswoman Martha Chavez of the conservative Catholic Opus Dei movement. "He knows that marriage isn't an issue only of traditions or of religious beliefs. Marriage is a natural institution that supports the union of two people of different sexes because it has a procreative function."

In Australia, where three bills that would allow gay marriage have been introduced in Parliament,Prime Minister Julia Gillard said she won't be following Obama's lead. She has consistently opposed gay marriage, though many members of her Labor Party support it.

"I've made my mind up and my position on this is well known," Gillard told reporters in Canberra. "I think it just reinforces this as a matter that people form their own views on, a deeply personal question people will think about, work their way through it; obviously President Obama has and he's announced a decision."

Religion-based opposition is strong in Egypt's conservative Muslim-dominated society, which rejects same-sex relations. Laws prohibiting "debauchery" or "shameless public acts" have been used to imprison gay men in recent years.

"This is unacceptable, because it is against religion, traditions and against God," said engineer Shady Azer in Cairo. "God created Adam and Eve. He didn't create two Adams or two Eves."

Gay marriage in legal in several countries; most are in Europe but others include Canada and South Africa. Several U.S. states allow it, but voters in many other states, including North Carolina on Tuesday, have banned it with constitutional amendments.

In 2010, Argentina became Latin America's first country to approve gay marriage. Cesar Cigliutti, president of the Gay Community of Argentina group, said Obama was only catching up to the rest of the world.

"It seems to me that by taking this position Obama is aligning himself with the entire world, with these times we're living in, with the achievements of rights in other countries," Cigliutti said.

Brazil's Supreme Court approved civil unions last year, followed by several state courts upholding the conversion of civil unions into full marriages. The nation's top appeals court then upheld those marriages in October, setting national precedent, but Catholic and evangelical churches and religious politicians continue to block the approval of any legislation in Congress enshrining gay marriage.

Moreira, the Brazilian activist, noted that efforts by President Dilma Rousseff to promote anti-homophobia education in Brazilian schools were scuttled last year after it became clear religious legislators would block unrelated legislation in protest.

In France, outgoing President Nicolas Sarkozy opposes gay marriage — though recent polls suggest that a majority of French voters support it. President-elect Francois Hollande, who defeated Sarkozy in elections Sunday, made "the right to marry and adopt for all couples" part of his campaign platform, and has set legislative passage of a bill ensuring that right for no later than June of next year.

Spain adopted its gay marriage law when the country was ruled by the center-left Socialist Party, but the center-right Popular Party took control of the government late last year.

Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy has said he would prefer civil unions instead of marriages, but his administration has made no move to change the current situation. His party does have an appeal of the gay marriage law pending before the country's Constitutional Court.

Jamaica's most prominent evangelical pastor and the island's political ombudsman, Bishop Herro Blair, said late Wednesday afternoon that he was just hearing about Obama's announcement and was still taking it in.

"For now, I can say that I cannot be mad at President Obama. We are in a society where people have choices. However, my belief runs contrary to his," Blair said in Kingston, the island's capital.

Though Obama's change of heart did not appear to change the battle lines in the debate, those on one side felt they had won a powerful ally.

"We're living in other times where acceptance is growing more and more," said restaurant owner Carlos Santiago in Mexico City's Pink Zone gay district. "It's impossible to hold back a wave, against something that is natural."

Anat Chen, a 20-year-old bartender in Jerusalem, said she expected more to come.

"Everyone should be allowed to marry whoever they want," she said. "It matters that Obama said it. Whatever happens in America, the rest of the world follows."

___

Associated Press writers Alan Clendenning in Madrid, Spain; David McFadden in Kingston, Jamaica; Maggie Michael in Cairo; Cassandra Vinograd in London; Isaac Garrido in Mexico City; Franklin Briceno in Lima, Peru; Bradley Brooks in Sao Paulo; Charmaine Noronha in Toronto; Ian Deitch in Jerusalem; Rod McGuirk in Canberra, Australia; and Debora Rey in Buenos Aires, Argentina, contributed to this report.

 

 

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-gay-marriage-support-seen-world-precedent-233515249.html;_ylt=A2KJ3CVFyqtPym4AhnjQtDMD

 

Have to give the president props on this one. I don't see a political advantage at this particular point in his administration. Sure, the base will be happy, but it'll piss off the religious right enough to balance that out. But it's good to see an American president taking the lead on civil rights in such a decisive way. As far as I know, with this announcement Obama has become the first American president to openly support gay marriage. Whatever else you think about his administration, he has done his legacy great service by this action.

[knapplc]

I didn't see this coming, especially in an election year. It's an odd statement, but appreciated nonetheless.

 

 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

[Muck]

Have to give the president props on this one. I don't see a political advantage at this particular point in his administration. Sure, the base will be happy, but it'll piss off the religious right enough to balance that out. But it's good to see an American president taking the lead on civil rights in such a decisive way. As far as I know, with this announcement Obama has become the first American president to openly support gay marriage. Whatever else you think about his administration, he has done his legacy great service by this action.

 

 

Note that it isn't quite the decisive 'taking the lead' you state...

 

"The president stressed that this is a personal position, and that he still supports the concept of states’ deciding the issue on their own."

[knapplc]

Note that it isn't quite the decisive 'taking the lead' you state...

 

"The president stressed that this is a personal position, and that he still supports the concept of states’ deciding the issue on their own."

 

Are you expecting King Obama to issue an edict or something? If he implies his opinion should hold sway over every state he's going to get vilified for stepping on states' rights.

[Husker_x]

Note that it isn't quite the decisive 'taking the lead' you state...

 

"The president stressed that this is a personal position, and that he still supports the concept of states’ deciding the issue on their own."

 

Are you expecting King Obama to issue an edict or something? If he implies his opinion should hold sway over every state he's going to get vilified for stepping on states' rights.

 

An American president, the most powerful person in the world, making a statement of preference on a highly controversial, hotly debated issue is, to me, a decisive action. It lends even more credence to the movement than it already had, and sets the tone/agenda of the political discourse for an entire party--or about half the country--in just a few words.

 

Like knap says, dude can't fall back on papal authority, but this is still sticking your neck out in an election year. I commend him for that.

[bhamHusker]

I consider gay rights and marriage equality to be a matter of human rights, and as such, they should not be left to individual states to decide. Obama can't rule by fiat, obviously, but he needs to lead by encouraging an effort at the federal level to ensure that equality is for everyone. It disgusts me that we leave issues of human rights to mob rule with a bunch of yokels at the state level. When you give a majority the ability to vote on whether or not it's OK to oppress a minority, you get predictable results.

[knapplc]

I think Obama's statement is meant to be just another in a series of baby steps toward the ultimate goal of actual equality. If we could get there patiently, without the uproar and turmoil that engulfed the 1960s, that would be good. I understand that's coming from me, a person free to marry and live my heterosexual life as I see fit, saying that about homosexuals who are already understandably frustrated with their unalienable rights being taken away, but they've been patient this long - hopefully not much longer will suffice to win the day.

[Muck]

Are you expecting King Obama to issue an edict or something? If he implies his opinion should hold sway over every state he's going to get vilified for stepping on states' rights.

 

On issues that are important to him he has a track record of ignoring (at best) or violating (at worse) States rights in order to accomplish his goals.

 

Suddenly using those same rights in order to qualify his personal view is not decisive leadership. It's milquetoast politics.

[knapplc]

Are you expecting King Obama to issue an edict or something? If he implies his opinion should hold sway over every state he's going to get vilified for stepping on states' rights.

 

On issues that are important to him he has a track record of ignoring (at best) or violating (at worse) States rights in order to accomplish his goals.

 

Suddenly using those same rights in order to qualify his personal view is not decisive leadership. It's milquetoast politics.

 

 

Minimize this all you want. It's still the most emphatic statement affirming gay marriage by a president in our country's history. You're seriously complaining he didn't go far enough? I find that difficult to believe.

[Hingle McCringleberry]

I think Obama's statement is meant to be just another in a series of baby steps toward the ultimate goal of actual equality. If we could get there patiently, without the uproar and turmoil that engulfed the 1960s, that would be good. I understand that's coming from me, a person free to marry and live my heterosexual life as I see fit, saying that about homosexuals who are already understandably frustrated with their unalienable rights being taken away, but they've been patient this long - hopefully not much longer will suffice to win the day.

 

 

I think this is a very common sense comment about the entire topic (or any polarizing topic) it doesn't matter what side you are on, but people need to take it easy, calling people hicks, red necks, back water, stupid, hate mongers, etc does nothing to advance your cause. Many people are uncomfortable with homosexuality and gay marriage. I understnad where both sides are coming from, and the only way to get anything done is to keep everyone calm about it. Some friends of mine that want gay marriage right now, make comments along the lines of "I cant wait until the older people die off so we can change these laws". Great thought process, that would be along the lines of 50% of the population you just wished dead...

[Muck]

Minimize this all you want. It's still the most emphatic statement in our country's history. You're seriously complaining he didn't go far enough? I find that difficult to believe.

 

I'm not complaining. I'm pointing out that what the President did was typical political fence sitting.

 

Bold political leadership does not start with "I believe x, but it should be up to y to decide".

[knapplc]

Minimize this all you want. It's still the most emphatic statement in our country's history. You're seriously complaining he didn't go far enough? I find that difficult to believe.

 

I'm not complaining. I'm pointing out that what the President did was typical political fence sitting.

 

Bold political leadership does not start with "I believe x, but it should be up to y to decide".

 

Name one other sitting president who has openly endorsed gay marriage.

[Muck]

Name one other sitting president who has openly endorsed gay marriage.

 

Name another fish besides red herring.

 

I'm not saying it isn't a good thing (double negative yay!) or that it isn't unprecedented for this specific topic. Again I am merely mentioning specifically that it is all the result of the political pandering. The timing, the attempt to appease the black community (with it's much higher rate of homophobia then the general population), the deliberate use of qualifiers to try & distance his statement from the inevitable backlash.

 

It is a nice step but it is not 'decisive leadership'.

[Husker_x]

Name one other sitting president who has openly endorsed gay marriage.

 

Name another fish besides red herring.

 

I'm not saying it isn't a good thing (double negative yay!) or that it isn't unprecedented for this specific topic. Again I am merely mentioning specifically that it is all the result of the political pandering. The timing, the attempt to appease the black community (with it's much higher rate of homophobia then the general population), the deliberate use of qualifiers to try & distance his statement from the inevitable backlash.

 

It is a nice step but it is not 'decisive leadership'.

 

It is decisive leadership. Gay rights is a topic on the ballot somewhere in this country all the time. The president lending his voice of support is a very useful, morale building boost. He doesn't need to lead the charge. He just needs to set the tone for the remainder of his administration.

 

Obama doesn't need to lead a crusade on every issue, especially not while we're at war. He has enough on his plate. I think he made a smart move here.

[knapplc]

Name one other sitting president who has openly endorsed gay marriage.

 

Name another fish besides red herring.

 

I'm not saying it isn't a good thing (double negative yay!) or that it isn't unprecedented for this specific topic. Again I am merely mentioning specifically that it is all the result of the political pandering. The timing, the attempt to appease the black community (with it's much higher rate of homophobia then the general population), the deliberate use of qualifiers to try & distance his statement from the inevitable backlash.

 

It is a nice step but it is not 'decisive leadership'.

 

It doesn't become a red herring because you don't like the answer you're forced to give. It's the first time in history a sitting president has openly endorsed gay marriage. It is not an inconsequential moment.

 

Is it King marching on Selma? Of course not. But as x pointed out, Obama doesn't need to lead this charge. In fact, he had zero reason to do anything. At all. This is not a hot-button topic this cycle. It's an out-of-left-field statement.

 

You're basically saying the moon landing wasn't a big deal because we were just there to visit. It's a precedent. That makes it a big deal.