Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If, by your own admmission, the majority of the public is in support of SSM, where's the problem? The law is then supported by the majority, you said so yourself.
That more and more people are willing (and more and more will continue to, as years go by) to re-examine their thinking and realize they were wrong before?
Admitting one was mistaken takes courage and intelligence more often than not. Good for them "
Personne, thank you for your respectful response, and I am sorry if I wasn't clear in my previous explanation.
I certainly have no problem with any politician genuinely having a change of heart on the issue of gay marriage, and I respect people on both sides of this issue. What really ticks me off is that David Axelrod (Obama's chief political strategist) stated that the president lied about his position on gay marriage for his own political benefit back in 2008:
"Barack Obama misled Americans for his own political benefit when he claimed in the 2008 election to oppose same sex marriage for religious reasons, his former political strategist David Axelrod writes in a new book, Believer: My Forty Years in Politics.
“I’m just not very good at bull****ting,” Obama told Axelrod, after an event where he stated his opposition to same-sex marriage, according to the book.
Axelrod writes that he knew Obama was in favor of same-sex marriages during the first presidential campaign, even as Obama publicly said he only supported civil unions, not full marriages. Axelrod also admits to counseling Obama to conceal that position for political reasons. “Opposition to gay marriage was particularly strong in the black church, and as he ran for higher office, he grudgingly accepted the counsel of more pragmatic folks like me, and modified his position to support civil unions rather than marriage, which he would term a ‘sacred union,’ ” Axelrod writes."
"Not even mentionning the ludicrous claim that all the socially liberal judges were appointed by Obama "
I never said they were all appointed by him, but obviously he appointed many judges to the federal judiciary.
"All politicians lie. Haven't you figured that out yet. But this isn't on obama, this is the supreme court's ruling."
I know this is the Supreme Court's ruling, but they were taking an issue that was dealt with in lower courts.
This is getting a bit off-topic (of what I want the real point of this thread to be), but does anybody believe that gay marriage would be legal in all 50 states today if John McCain had been president since January 20, 2009.
A bit more on topic is the fact that I know that all politicians lie, but I do recall that back in 2008 that Obama was supposed to be a different sort of politician, one who supposedly didn't play the games that the others did. It looks like that was the biggest lie of all on team Obama's part.
I really think that in the long-run the liberals will regret the way they attained victory in the gay marriage debate. The truth of the matter (much to my disappointment) was that public attitudes would eventually change, and the public would condone homosexuality and--more generally--gay marriage.
Yep. And this is exactly what happened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dole-McCain Republican
However, social liberals were very impatient with this change, and felt that "the ends justified the means." To that end, they instructed the Democratic establishment politicians (from Obama on down) to deliberately lie to the people and say that they were opposed to gay marriage (back when the majority of Americans were opposed to it).
Really? Do you have proof of that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dole-McCain Republican
Then, at almost precisely the exact moment a majority of people supported gay marriage, the entire Democratic establishment "evolved" and claimed to have had a genuine change of heart on the issue.
See the first part of your post above. Democrats are people, too, you know, and part of the pubic whose attitudes changed over time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dole-McCain Republican
In the meantime, Obama & company packed the judiciary with socially liberal judges who overturned voter-approved bans on gay marriage; this had the effect of shifting public opinion in favor of gay marriage at a far faster rate than would otherwise have happened.
Obama has appointed two Supreme Court justices. The court remains right leaning. Now, do you have any proof that the appointment of Sotomayor and Kagan shifted public opinion "faster than would otherwise have happened"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dole-McCain Republican
If any liberal thinks that this lesson is lost on establishment Republicans, he or she is sorely mistaken. There is no excuse for this sickening deception (regardless of how you feel on any issue), but you can expect clever Republican politicians to employ similar tactics in the future. Personally, I predict that some socially conservative Republicans--in an attempt to woo women voters in blue and purple states--will pretend to be a lot more centrist on the issue of abortion than they actually are. As a matter of fact, we saw this in last year's CO Senate race when Cory Gardner walked back his previous support of a personhood amendment. (This reminded me so much of how candidate Obama claimed to support traditional marriage and retracted a 1996 statement in support of gay marriage.) Democrats should get ready for a much larger scale deception on the part of social conservatives, now that the liberals managed to win the gay marriage debate in the most underhanded and dishonest way possible. And after the conservatives have lied and packed the judiciary with staunch right-wing judges, I will feel zero sympathy for the liberal Democrats because it was their idol--Barack Obama--who showed us all how to deceive the voters.
Yeah, yeah, yeah...we're all shaking in our boots.
I really think that in the long-run the liberals will regret the way they attained victory in the gay marriage debate. The truth of the matter (much to my disappointment) was that public attitudes would eventually change, and the public would condone homosexuality and--more generally--gay marriage. However, social liberals were very impatient with this change, and felt that "the ends justified the means." To that end, they instructed the Democratic establishment politicians (from Obama on down) to deliberately lie to the people and say that they were opposed to gay marriage (back when the majority of Americans were opposed to it). Then, at almost precisely the exact moment a majority of people supported gay marriage, the entire Democratic establishment "evolved" and claimed to have had a genuine change of heart on the issue. In the meantime, Obama & company packed the judiciary with socially liberal judges who overturned voter-approved bans on gay marriage; this had the effect of shifting public opinion in favor of gay marriage at a far faster rate than would otherwise have happened.
If any liberal thinks that this lesson is lost on establishment Republicans, he or she is sorely mistaken. There is no excuse for this sickening deception (regardless of how you feel on any issue), but you can expect clever Republican politicians to employ similar tactics in the future. Personally, I predict that some socially conservative Republicans--in an attempt to woo women voters in blue and purple states--will pretend to be a lot more centrist on the issue of abortion than they actually are. As a matter of fact, we saw this in last year's CO Senate race when Cory Gardner walked back his previous support of a personhood amendment. (This reminded me so much of how candidate Obama claimed to support traditional marriage and retracted a 1996 statement in support of gay marriage.) Democrats should get ready for a much larger scale deception on the part of social conservatives, now that the liberals managed to win the gay marriage debate in the most underhanded and dishonest way possible. And after the conservatives have lied and packed the judiciary with staunch right-wing judges, I will feel zero sympathy for the liberal Democrats because it was their idol--Barack Obama--who showed us all how to deceive the voters.
Actually, I do have proof that Obama blatantly lied to the public back in 2008 about gay marriage. Please refer to the article that I posted above where David Axelrod admits that Obama did exact that.
It's not always just up to the POTUS, it's a social change driven by the citizens and it has nothing to do with anyone "lying". My own personal opinion on this topic (and many others) has ping ponged around over the years as well.
Times are changing. A new generation is taking over. Deal with it."
Since times were changing, and a new generation was taking over, why was it necessary for the Democrats to lie to the people back in 2008 in order to get elected? I am guessing that your moral standards are so low that you condone lying, which pretty much tells me what type of human being you are.
Um, OP, in your first post you condone lying and say clever conservatives are going to lie in the future.
Didn't read whole thread, but this does seem a little sleazy:
Quote:
Barack Obama misled Americans for his own political benefit when he claimed in the 2008 election to oppose same sex marriage for religious reasons, his former political strategist David Axelrod writes in a new book, Believer: My Forty Years in Politics.
.....
As a state senate candidate in 1996, Obama filled out a questionnaire saying “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.” But 12 years later as a candidate for president, Obama told Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church that marriage could only extend to heterosexual couples. “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman,” Obama said at the time. “Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”
When you're lying and pulling God into your reasoning...wow. The religious principles one espouses are suppsed to be core beliefs that don't flip-flop with the polls in a manner of 4 years. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if Obama is atheist....but of coure that would mean he bull****ted everyone during a eulogy for 9 blacks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"
