It would take new legislation to extend full health coverage to the same-sex partners of federal employees, but President Obama, via presidential memorandum, will grant some benefits to them.
The administration is already on thin ice with gay activists, some of whom are angry about a Justice Department brief defending the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, the very law that prevents the government from recognizing the rights of gay couples.
Update from the AP: “‘We all have to acknowledge this is only one step,’ Obama said in the Oval Office, where he signed a memorandum extending some benefits, such as visitation or dependent-care rights, to the same-sex partners of gay federal employees.
But the president’s critics — and there were many — saw the incremental move to expand gay rights as little more than pandering to a reliably Democratic voting bloc, with the primary aim not of making policy more fair but of cutting short a fundraising boycott.”
As a presidential candidate, Mr. Obama vowed to “fight hard” for the rights of gay couples. As a senator, he sponsored legislation that would have provided health benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees. But since becoming president five months ago, Mr. Obama has not addressed the issue or whether gays can serve openly in the military, a point of contention for gay-rights groups.
Joe Solmonese, the president of the Human Rights Campaign, wrote an angry letterto the White House on Monday about the administration’s move to file a legal brief supporting the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act.
“As an American, a civil rights advocate, and a human being, I hold this administration to a higher standard than this brief,” Mr. Solmonese wrote. “In the course of your campaign, I became convinced — and I still want to believe — that you do, too.”
If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.
No No No, you can not pinpoint the misbehavior of some people on somebody, who has an idee build up in the last 50 years.
What I mean that in a society, people start to work together while they have the same religion or way of living together, thats building a society in an society.
Look when I speak about pervert behavior, than I speek about things I have seen and heard from friends of mine, who are or where Homosexuals, I do know as every body knows that you find pervert people every where, in all classes and kind of people.
What I whant to say is that if you give some people a place in the Sun, they take all the Sunlicht, and lateron they are going to put every thing up side down, With this kind of thinking they want to give them selfs the right to be as the are, and than are going for things who where created for a men and woman, just for legalization.
We know that not every body is created the same way, and most of the people know their are different way’s in sexual behavior, and have accepted that, what do you want more, the point is to be accepted in an society, and than you have to live and behave, as the others around you, thats a society.
I am not a Hater of people who live with other insights of live, but I like things clear, and straight.
You see nothing in a gay rights parade that you don’t see at Mardi Gras or cinco de mayo. You do not identify the behavior of the men and women at those parades as indicative of heterosexuality. Only a moron would try to tie similar behavior at a gay parade to homosexuality.
Again, you set yourself up as ‘decent’ implying anyone not like you is not decent.
You continue to use the word ‘homo’ and ‘pervert’ so few, other than like minded bigots, will take you seriously in any debate on the issue.
So there are gay bankers and doctors and judges. So freakin what? There are black and asian and hispanic judges, bankers and doctors. There are Catholic, Mormon, Unitarian and Buddist judges, doctors and bankers…
Do you have an intelligent point to make? Because all I read from you is a rant that you are normal and decent and those of us who are gay are not?
Amsterdan was the first City in the world to recognize the rights of other thinking an behaving people, thats to say Homo’s and Lesbians.
Now they are creating getho’s, to live, and economic getho’s, so they create an society in an society, you will find homo bankers homo judges home’s every where,
They go from onfriendly to hostile, clubs and cafe’s
only for homo’s or lesbians, a Gay parade with all their small payed saters, and let every body see their lusts, discusting, its not a general happen
ing fortunate for the decent people with a different way of sexual behavior.
“I don’t want to hurt you or any other person, but the truth is the truth.”
What rings true to you isn’t going to ring true to others.
The problem is when someone sees what they believe to be the truth as concrete and unchangeable. Times change. 200 years ago it was a self-evident truth that slavery, which existed as an institution for thousands of years was God’s way because the bible teaches it.
Today nobody will promote that idea as the truth.
What you believe is your business. But don’t try to justify your insulting language based on what you consider to be the truth. I do not see it as the truth. And more and more people are beginning to agree with me. As the older generations die off and the younger ones come of age - we are only a decade away from seeing a majority of the population support marriage equality.
Sunshine1167….Whether or not straight women ‘want to’ marry or not is irrelevant. They have the option. Your father has the option. Choosing not to marry is not the same as not being able to.
There is a choice involved that we don’t have. Therefore, equality doesn’t exist.
You want the luxury of having the right to the benefit (marriage), and also the rights of marriage without marriage. And you seem to imply that because some gay couples have some rights of marriage without actual marriage - you and other heterosexuals are now being discriminated against. It’s baffling to me.
In fact, gay couples who have been granted the few marriage rights can only get them through domestic partnerships or civil unions - legally binding contracts. Mere boyfriends or girlfriends won’t qualify.
And civil unions and DP’s - in those states that provide them - are open to heterosexuals as well. They had to make them open to heterosexuals so that straight bigots wouldn’t cry about homosexuals being given ‘special rights.’ LOL…
Problem is, few if any heterosexuals opt for civil unions or DP’s for obvious reasons. And because they don’t people tend to forget they are open to heterosexuals.
So you have exactly the same rights and options that we have. And you continue to have the granddaddy of rights and obligations that we do not.
Your father can enter a civil union or DP with his girlfriend, if his state offers them, and still remain true to his pledge to his wife - because civil unions and DP’s are not marriage.
I don’t want to hurt you or any other person, but the truth is the truth.
Further more why do you need other people or an feek mariage to be happy with your choosen one.
The words I have used, are the words the people in the street make use of if they speak about homo’s or lesbians.
Some of the history is not in favor of people with an other way of sexual behavior.
In the Katholiek church its still an public secret that most of the preast are homosexual, in the time of the inquisitie most of the priest who killed for the church where homosexual.
In the German SS most where homosexuals, well I hope I dont opset you but all groups when they come together are capable of on human behavior.
Well it is certainly the same for other people, we are all people but some rules have to be.
Robin,
There is no reasaon to be rude to other posters. We are in an adult discussion forum.
Yes, straight females have the ability to marry, but some may not want to. Maybe they would still like to insure their boyfriend.
My dad has had the same girlfriend for 5 years, he can’t put her on his insutance. He does not wish to marry as he made a promise to my mother to never marry again when she passed away, a promise I am sure he made at an emotional time but chooses to keep.
Arlanthe, thank you for the addiitonal information that I did not see in the story.
On the subject or our President…
While I did not vote for him, I was initially a fan of Mr. Obama, but as we go forward that is changing. There seems to be a new social idea presented everyday. (Yes I am aware that is an exaggeration)
It seems that people no longer have to worry about working and supporting themselves. The governemnt will do it for them! The only question is where all this money will come from….
By Le Roi, June 17, 2009 at 9:43 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Obama would not exist if those biggots had it their ways. They had the same arguments against inter-racial marriage. Obama should no longer worry about those biggots who would not vote for him anyways.
“So, if I am straight and I have a boyfriend I can not have him on my insurance. But if I am gay, I can call my girlfriend my “partner” and she gets all benefits…very interesting!”
Stupid argument… I mean really…
If you’re straight and have a boyfriend, you have the option of marrying him. You have a choice. But if you’re gay and have a girlfriend, you cannot marry her. There is no choice. Even now in the government those who have a DP or CU aren’t afforded the same rights or respects as those who can marry….
Do you really think a straight woman who has the option to marry compares to a gay woman who does not?
THINK!!!!
And to NOT A DEMOCRAT…. LOL.. The founding principles of this nation have never been implemented or realized. The founding principle has been one of total equality and fairness. It’s in the documents. It is our ideal… We pledge allegience to liberty and justice for all, and then go about denying those who are different those very things. Such hypocrits Americans are. Unfortunately, we had an addiction to slavery to overcome. Then we had to let the women out of the kitchens to vote and eventually decide what they want to be…. and now we have another classification of people… gay citizens who are treated as 2nd class citizens. So we’re working toward a realization of the founding principles of this nation, not falling further away from them. Equality is a birthright. The idea that gay people can only be treated equally if every state holds an election on it and a majority of it’s citizens agree is disgusting.
And I’m sick to death of hearing people say there are more important things to deal with. For whom? I’m nearly 50 and have never had the same opportunities in my ‘pursuit of happiness’ that my brothers have had. I’m sick of people marginalizing that because they aren’t being denied anything. Thank you Xntrk for putting it into perspective.
And lastly to Johannes… I’m tired of your use of words like homo and pervert when addressing us.. If you cannot be respectful why don’t you just shut up? For someone who does not see this as a major issue, you are here posting on every and any story that deals with gay rights, and using the most offensive language you can.
Jeff from California is wrong about a couple of things. This law [DOMA] has nothing to do with gay marriage, rather it denies gay federal employees benefits for their partners - married or not. It also specifically ignores the Constutional requirement that all states must recognize contracts legally made in another state [i.e. marriage or legal life partnerships between members of the same sex]. Therefore, a couple married in New Hampshire would not be recognized as a legal couple in TX or California and the rights of the partners would no longer have to be recognized. This would affect joint property, rights of survivorship, and custody status if there were dependents.
Just because the citizens of California have demonstrated they are bigoted asses, should not give them the prerogative to inflict their bigotry on those who may be forced to move to the state because of employment or a family crisis.
Arlanthe, please don’t assume all of us old farts are bigots. I am 72, and strait. That doesn’t also make me a red-neck.
And last, a few comments to the BHO apologists. When are you going to give up on the excuses? The man not only asked for this job, he begged for it. He also spent millions of other people’s time and money on getting it. Those people have every right to expect him to spend some time on their problems, as well as those of Wall Street.
Not only did he ask for the job, he got to appoint friends and Republicans to high positions, as well as employing thousands of people in the federal government whose jobs are to implement his policies.
If he can have a date in NYC, and another in Paris, and attend the kid’s soccer matches, and help garden, and play with the puppy; surely he could take 15 minutes to ask Halder what the Department of Justice brief said in the DOMA case. It is his job to make sure the federal government works for the BHO Administration, not that of George W.
No one should be denied rights enjoyed by the majority because of race, creed, or color or sexual identity. That last part has been in the Democratic Party Platform for at least 25 years, if not longer. I thought BHO ran as a Democrat. Now, I find he might rather be a Republican. He might have had some trouble getting elected in Chicago as a Republican, however
I think most of New England is more liberal than California, California just has a lot of political inertia, and the areas in which we are liberal tend to be environmental and labor related. New England is definitely friendlier to gay marriage than California, which is why all but one New England state has adopted marriage equality (and there are strong indications the voters in each of these states will reject constitutional bans on gay marriage).
I don’t see what is so radical about gay rights advocates, and this is indeed a matter of civil rights and access to over 1,000 benefits. Shutting up and sitting down has never worked in the past for any social movement, whereas harping on the issue, marching, and raising awareness and making a ruckus has. I regret that the loudest among the 48% of us in California who voted against marriage discrimination are alienating a few of you among the 52% that supported stripping a group of people of their constitutional rights in the state, but the demographic data clearly show we will win this fight by continuously pushing the issue with an eye toward younger voters and waiting, not attempting to “convert” anyone. It is simply a matter of time as older, pro-discrimination voters die off and newer, overwhelmingly gay friendly younger voters replace them. If the 1.25% trend over the last 10 years holds, Prop 8 will be overturned sometime around 2012. Even if the rate slows down, it will be 2016 at the latest (and evidence shows acceptance is accelerating).
You aren’t going to change your mind, so I won’t bother trying. I will just be loud and wait.
I’m from California, probably still the most liberal state, and we just had a huge referendum on the question of gay marriage. The proponents of gay marriage saw their initiative fail miserably, something like 60% against. That’s not for nothing in a state like mine. The radical homosexual lobby is pressing way too hard on these issues, at this time. If they continue to attempt to force feed the nation on this issue, they’ll be in danger of losing people like me who aren’t really down with gay marriage, but are content to see the winds change on the issue over time. Furthermore, attempts to frame the issue as one of civil rights is misguided, since the issue is not one of access.
I’m totally sympathetic to gay rights. I also think Obama has one hell of a mess to deal with right now and this will take time and, quite frankly, it isn’t a top priority. The world economy is in a meltdown and a few wars are being fought (mistakenly..but they’re there). I hate to ask for patience when basic rights are at stake but timing is important too. It will happen - it is right - and this guy knows it.
To my fellow LGBT community members, have we ever heard of the best time and place to discuss an issue?
Yes it is true that President Obama made some promises and yes it is true that their is inequality in the current situation, but lets look at the broader picture. The president and his staff are dealing with an unstable Iraq, Afghanistan, a failing economy, major companies closing their doors, health care reform, not to mention a crazy person in N. Korea playing with nukes! I do NOT envy this man, I feel sorry for him.
I believe if we give the president a bit of room to breathe and allow him to address the Crisis’ at hand so we all don’t get incinerated or end up living in a box on 3rd street. He will make good on his promises
By Straight J, June 17, 2009 at 1:21 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I honestly hope all gays that want an official, legalized, protected name for the joining of two loved ones with plans for forever to finally happen.
I think there are more important things at this moment that need fixed. Really.
Two wars to get out of, recession, healthcare, and jobs. It’s been six months. Let’s get a bit further along with these before we go there with the “too little too late” crap. He is the leader of the free world, ya know.
Anyways, as soon as we get better with the economics, we get to the social issues.
I’m in your corner guys/gals, just let him do his job. Leave him a message and he’ll get back with you.
To Xntrk and everynobody—Please refer to our FAQ page on commenting http://www.truthdig.com/about/comment_policy/, which offers solutions to the problems you may be experiencing, as well as instructions on how to register and log in. Please report any technical issues to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address); a Truthdig staff member will respond to you and resolve the issue.
By Xntrk, June 17, 2009 at 12:28 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
1960 flashbacks. Read some of the letters ot the editor from those days, substitute Blacks for Gays, and many of these comments would fit right in.
I am one of that group Rachel Maddow refered to as those being interested in Civil Liberties for all, rather than a member of the Gay/Lesbian voting block. Reading the language of the Justice Department’s brief defending DOMA, goes far beyond simply defending this law. It is insulting and demeaning. Note: Her interview with with Howard Dean on this topic, is not posted here. Try Buzzflash.
It would be invigorating to live in a country that HAD equal rights for all. Instead, we give the concept lip-service, and then spy on migrants, arrest Muslims for who they are rather then for what they have done, and continue to segregate our minorities, using money rather than skin color to achieve the same result.
everynobody: I read your post about being unable to register and having posts deleted. I too have the same problem. FYI, if you are still checking this site, I think I know why. The program used to censor posts is only looking for certain words. Like most machines, it doesn’t understand context. Too much to expect humans to do the work in this day and age! Don’t bother to use the Contact Us approach. Apparently, humans don’t reply to the e-mails either…
BobbieBoo- What does “same sex marriage” have to do with “sex”? Nothing. The word “sex” has multiple definitions, it is a demographic descriptor and a physical act. Same sex marriage refers to demographics, not the act of sex. It is inappropriate to talk about any kind of sex at work, but I have a clue that when people talk about same sex marriage at your work, they are talking about laws, and rights, and tax benefits, and privileges extended to married couples, and court decisions, and protests. I’ll bet none of them have talked about the actual physical act, and if they do, it is inappropriate.
These are two different concepts that happen to have the same word “sex” in it. People- gay or straight can get married and not have sex. They are called platonic marriages and happen more than you think, yet we still call it same sex marriage, because that is what it is demographically referred do. Would you prefer same-gender marriage? Also, people can talk about the legal implications of the rights and benefits extended to the contract of marriage, people can talk about all sorts of issues related to the legal term “same sex marriage”. It has nothing to do with the act itself.
If I talk about the fact my dog had a litter of four puppies, all of the same sex, does that mean I am talking about bestiality at work? If on a customer survey I ask for the sex of the respondent, does that mean I am harassing them? Open a dictionary.
Also, Sunshine- it isn’t that easy, you have to be married or registered domestic partners, which is a legal contract and full of obligations. To that end, people get married all the time for benefits. I used to work for the San Diego County Recorders office issuing marriage licenses and performing civil ceremonies. People get married for benefits all the time- such as to get someone into the country, and particularly in the military, to get into military housing or get military benefits. This was a weekly occurrence in San Diego and people admitted it openly (especially Navy corpsmen…). Religiously, marriage may be sacred, but civilly, it is just a contract.
By Not A Democrat, June 17, 2009 at 9:11 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Seriously, this is not cool. My HUSBAND can’t even get insurance on his wife and child, but yet a homosexual can call thier bf/gf a “partner” and get benefits on a FEDERAL level. The founding principals of this country is going down the toilet. Welcome to the Obama era.
So, if I am straight and I have a boyfriend I can not have him on my insurance. But if I am gay, I can call my girlfriend my “partner” and she gets all benefits…very interesting!
Their have to be, homo’s and lesbians in your redaction,they keep hammering on it, we know they excists, but why all the time advertise them, lots of people think still about them, as dirty and having sex on an onnaturel way, some say even that they are born with some perversity in them.
I think a subject like this needs time and has to be explained, but not pushing it through their throats, that creates enemy’s and hate.
Plus lots of people want to keep marriage clean and for men and woman, a wedding dress is stil some thing very special, also the wedding ring, it are old costums in our society, and most people want to hold it like this.
This dont mean that people want to do harm to other thinking and living people, but they want to hold this old costums as they are, outside the sexworld.
By marlen e, June 17, 2009 at 1:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Gays cant win through voters, Gays cant win at the Supreme Court, Gays cant win with Catholics, Gays cant win with Black Churches. Hispanics will vote against Gays since they are Catholics. The White Evangelist is getting ballots ready, So they find a President who they think is their slave to do in 5 months, what they could not do in 16 years. Which Proves, the Whole Gay thing is about WHITE SUPREMACY AND GAYS WANT SUPREMACY TO PUSH THEIR AGENDA IN SCHOOLS.
Arctic Tundra ‘Will Turn to Forest’
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
By johannes, June 19, 2009 at 2:25 am Link to this comment
No No No, you can not pinpoint the misbehavior of some people on somebody, who has an idee build up in the last 50 years.
What I mean that in a society, people start to work together while they have the same religion or way of living together, thats building a society in an society.
Look when I speak about pervert behavior, than I speek about things I have seen and heard from friends of mine, who are or where Homosexuals, I do know as every body knows that you find pervert people every where, in all classes and kind of people.
What I whant to say is that if you give some people a place in the Sun, they take all the Sunlicht, and lateron they are going to put every thing up side down, With this kind of thinking they want to give them selfs the right to be as the are, and than are going for things who where created for a men and woman, just for legalization.
We know that not every body is created the same way, and most of the people know their are different way’s in sexual behavior, and have accepted that, what do you want more, the point is to be accepted in an society, and than you have to live and behave, as the others around you, thats a society.
I am not a Hater of people who live with other insights of live, but I like things clear, and straight.
Salutations
Report thisBy RobertinWestbury, June 18, 2009 at 5:12 pm Link to this comment
Johannes…
You see nothing in a gay rights parade that you don’t see at Mardi Gras or cinco de mayo. You do not identify the behavior of the men and women at those parades as indicative of heterosexuality. Only a moron would try to tie similar behavior at a gay parade to homosexuality.
Again, you set yourself up as ‘decent’ implying anyone not like you is not decent.
You continue to use the word ‘homo’ and ‘pervert’ so few, other than like minded bigots, will take you seriously in any debate on the issue.
So there are gay bankers and doctors and judges. So freakin what? There are black and asian and hispanic judges, bankers and doctors. There are Catholic, Mormon, Unitarian and Buddist judges, doctors and bankers…
Do you have an intelligent point to make? Because all I read from you is a rant that you are normal and decent and those of us who are gay are not?
Report thisBy johannes, June 18, 2009 at 10:30 am Link to this comment
Well Robert in Westbury
Its up to you and me, waths pervert behavior.
Amsterdan was the first City in the world to recognize the rights of other thinking an behaving people, thats to say Homo’s and Lesbians.
Now they are creating getho’s, to live, and economic getho’s, so they create an society in an society, you will find homo bankers homo judges home’s every where,
They go from onfriendly to hostile, clubs and cafe’s
Report thisonly for homo’s or lesbians, a Gay parade with all their small payed saters, and let every body see their lusts, discusting, its not a general happen
ing fortunate for the decent people with a different way of sexual behavior.
By RobertinWestbury, June 18, 2009 at 6:13 am Link to this comment
JOhannes,
“I don’t want to hurt you or any other person, but the truth is the truth.”
What rings true to you isn’t going to ring true to others.
The problem is when someone sees what they believe to be the truth as concrete and unchangeable. Times change. 200 years ago it was a self-evident truth that slavery, which existed as an institution for thousands of years was God’s way because the bible teaches it.
Today nobody will promote that idea as the truth.
What you believe is your business. But don’t try to justify your insulting language based on what you consider to be the truth. I do not see it as the truth. And more and more people are beginning to agree with me. As the older generations die off and the younger ones come of age - we are only a decade away from seeing a majority of the population support marriage equality.
Report thisBy RobertinWestbury, June 18, 2009 at 6:07 am Link to this comment
Sunshine1167….Whether or not straight women ‘want to’ marry or not is irrelevant. They have the option. Your father has the option. Choosing not to marry is not the same as not being able to.
There is a choice involved that we don’t have. Therefore, equality doesn’t exist.
You want the luxury of having the right to the benefit (marriage), and also the rights of marriage without marriage. And you seem to imply that because some gay couples have some rights of marriage without actual marriage - you and other heterosexuals are now being discriminated against. It’s baffling to me.
In fact, gay couples who have been granted the few marriage rights can only get them through domestic partnerships or civil unions - legally binding contracts. Mere boyfriends or girlfriends won’t qualify.
And civil unions and DP’s - in those states that provide them - are open to heterosexuals as well. They had to make them open to heterosexuals so that straight bigots wouldn’t cry about homosexuals being given ‘special rights.’ LOL…
Problem is, few if any heterosexuals opt for civil unions or DP’s for obvious reasons. And because they don’t people tend to forget they are open to heterosexuals.
So you have exactly the same rights and options that we have. And you continue to have the granddaddy of rights and obligations that we do not.
Your father can enter a civil union or DP with his girlfriend, if his state offers them, and still remain true to his pledge to his wife - because civil unions and DP’s are not marriage.
Report thisBy johannes, June 18, 2009 at 5:54 am Link to this comment
Dear Sir, Robert in Westbury
I don’t want to hurt you or any other person, but the truth is the truth.
Further more why do you need other people or an feek mariage to be happy with your choosen one.
The words I have used, are the words the people in the street make use of if they speak about homo’s or lesbians.
Some of the history is not in favor of people with an other way of sexual behavior.
In the Katholiek church its still an public secret that most of the preast are homosexual, in the time of the inquisitie most of the priest who killed for the church where homosexual.
In the German SS most where homosexuals, well I hope I dont opset you but all groups when they come together are capable of on human behavior.
Well it is certainly the same for other people, we are all people but some rules have to be.
I wish you all the best and lots of happyness.
salutation.
Report thisBy Sunshine1167, June 18, 2009 at 4:09 am Link to this comment
Robin,
There is no reasaon to be rude to other posters. We are in an adult discussion forum.
Yes, straight females have the ability to marry, but some may not want to. Maybe they would still like to insure their boyfriend.
My dad has had the same girlfriend for 5 years, he can’t put her on his insutance. He does not wish to marry as he made a promise to my mother to never marry again when she passed away, a promise I am sure he made at an emotional time but chooses to keep.
Arlanthe, thank you for the addiitonal information that I did not see in the story.
On the subject or our President…
While I did not vote for him, I was initially a fan of Mr. Obama, but as we go forward that is changing. There seems to be a new social idea presented everyday. (Yes I am aware that is an exaggeration)
It seems that people no longer have to worry about working and supporting themselves. The governemnt will do it for them! The only question is where all this money will come from….
Report thisBy Le Roi, June 17, 2009 at 9:43 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Obama would not exist if those biggots had it their ways. They had the same arguments against inter-racial marriage. Obama should no longer worry about those biggots who would not vote for him anyways.
Report thisBy RobertinWestbury, June 17, 2009 at 8:46 pm Link to this comment
“So, if I am straight and I have a boyfriend I can not have him on my insurance. But if I am gay, I can call my girlfriend my “partner” and she gets all benefits…very interesting!”
Stupid argument… I mean really…
If you’re straight and have a boyfriend, you have the option of marrying him. You have a choice. But if you’re gay and have a girlfriend, you cannot marry her. There is no choice. Even now in the government those who have a DP or CU aren’t afforded the same rights or respects as those who can marry….
Do you really think a straight woman who has the option to marry compares to a gay woman who does not?
THINK!!!!
And to NOT A DEMOCRAT…. LOL.. The founding principles of this nation have never been implemented or realized. The founding principle has been one of total equality and fairness. It’s in the documents. It is our ideal… We pledge allegience to liberty and justice for all, and then go about denying those who are different those very things. Such hypocrits Americans are. Unfortunately, we had an addiction to slavery to overcome. Then we had to let the women out of the kitchens to vote and eventually decide what they want to be…. and now we have another classification of people… gay citizens who are treated as 2nd class citizens. So we’re working toward a realization of the founding principles of this nation, not falling further away from them. Equality is a birthright. The idea that gay people can only be treated equally if every state holds an election on it and a majority of it’s citizens agree is disgusting.
And I’m sick to death of hearing people say there are more important things to deal with. For whom? I’m nearly 50 and have never had the same opportunities in my ‘pursuit of happiness’ that my brothers have had. I’m sick of people marginalizing that because they aren’t being denied anything. Thank you Xntrk for putting it into perspective.
And lastly to Johannes… I’m tired of your use of words like homo and pervert when addressing us.. If you cannot be respectful why don’t you just shut up? For someone who does not see this as a major issue, you are here posting on every and any story that deals with gay rights, and using the most offensive language you can.
Report thisBy Xntrk, June 17, 2009 at 8:04 pm Link to this comment
Jeff from California is wrong about a couple of things. This law [DOMA] has nothing to do with gay marriage, rather it denies gay federal employees benefits for their partners - married or not. It also specifically ignores the Constutional requirement that all states must recognize contracts legally made in another state [i.e. marriage or legal life partnerships between members of the same sex]. Therefore, a couple married in New Hampshire would not be recognized as a legal couple in TX or California and the rights of the partners would no longer have to be recognized. This would affect joint property, rights of survivorship, and custody status if there were dependents.
Just because the citizens of California have demonstrated they are bigoted asses, should not give them the prerogative to inflict their bigotry on those who may be forced to move to the state because of employment or a family crisis.
Arlanthe, please don’t assume all of us old farts are bigots. I am 72, and strait. That doesn’t also make me a red-neck.
And last, a few comments to the BHO apologists. When are you going to give up on the excuses? The man not only asked for this job, he begged for it. He also spent millions of other people’s time and money on getting it. Those people have every right to expect him to spend some time on their problems, as well as those of Wall Street.
Not only did he ask for the job, he got to appoint friends and Republicans to high positions, as well as employing thousands of people in the federal government whose jobs are to implement his policies.
If he can have a date in NYC, and another in Paris, and attend the kid’s soccer matches, and help garden, and play with the puppy; surely he could take 15 minutes to ask Halder what the Department of Justice brief said in the DOMA case. It is his job to make sure the federal government works for the BHO Administration, not that of George W.
No one should be denied rights enjoyed by the majority because of race, creed, or color or sexual identity. That last part has been in the Democratic Party Platform for at least 25 years, if not longer. I thought BHO ran as a Democrat. Now, I find he might rather be a Republican. He might have had some trouble getting elected in Chicago as a Republican, however
Report thisBy Arlanthe, June 17, 2009 at 5:51 pm Link to this comment
Jeff,
I think most of New England is more liberal than California, California just has a lot of political inertia, and the areas in which we are liberal tend to be environmental and labor related. New England is definitely friendlier to gay marriage than California, which is why all but one New England state has adopted marriage equality (and there are strong indications the voters in each of these states will reject constitutional bans on gay marriage).
I don’t see what is so radical about gay rights advocates, and this is indeed a matter of civil rights and access to over 1,000 benefits. Shutting up and sitting down has never worked in the past for any social movement, whereas harping on the issue, marching, and raising awareness and making a ruckus has. I regret that the loudest among the 48% of us in California who voted against marriage discrimination are alienating a few of you among the 52% that supported stripping a group of people of their constitutional rights in the state, but the demographic data clearly show we will win this fight by continuously pushing the issue with an eye toward younger voters and waiting, not attempting to “convert” anyone. It is simply a matter of time as older, pro-discrimination voters die off and newer, overwhelmingly gay friendly younger voters replace them. If the 1.25% trend over the last 10 years holds, Prop 8 will be overturned sometime around 2012. Even if the rate slows down, it will be 2016 at the latest (and evidence shows acceptance is accelerating).
You aren’t going to change your mind, so I won’t bother trying. I will just be loud and wait.
Report thisBy jeff, June 17, 2009 at 4:31 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I’m from California, probably still the most liberal state, and we just had a huge referendum on the question of gay marriage. The proponents of gay marriage saw their initiative fail miserably, something like 60% against. That’s not for nothing in a state like mine. The radical homosexual lobby is pressing way too hard on these issues, at this time. If they continue to attempt to force feed the nation on this issue, they’ll be in danger of losing people like me who aren’t really down with gay marriage, but are content to see the winds change on the issue over time. Furthermore, attempts to frame the issue as one of civil rights is misguided, since the issue is not one of access.
Report thisBy Dee, June 17, 2009 at 2:45 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I’m totally sympathetic to gay rights. I also think Obama has one hell of a mess to deal with right now and this will take time and, quite frankly, it isn’t a top priority. The world economy is in a meltdown and a few wars are being fought (mistakenly..but they’re there). I hate to ask for patience when basic rights are at stake but timing is important too. It will happen - it is right - and this guy knows it.
Report thisBy Tom, June 17, 2009 at 1:43 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
To my fellow LGBT community members, have we ever heard of the best time and place to discuss an issue?
Yes it is true that President Obama made some promises and yes it is true that their is inequality in the current situation, but lets look at the broader picture. The president and his staff are dealing with an unstable Iraq, Afghanistan, a failing economy, major companies closing their doors, health care reform, not to mention a crazy person in N. Korea playing with nukes! I do NOT envy this man, I feel sorry for him.
I believe if we give the president a bit of room to breathe and allow him to address the Crisis’ at hand so we all don’t get incinerated or end up living in a box on 3rd street. He will make good on his promises
Report thisBy Straight J, June 17, 2009 at 1:21 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I honestly hope all gays that want an official, legalized, protected name for the joining of two loved ones with plans for forever to finally happen.
I think there are more important things at this moment that need fixed. Really.
Two wars to get out of, recession, healthcare, and jobs. It’s been six months. Let’s get a bit further along with these before we go there with the “too little too late” crap. He is the leader of the free world, ya know.
Anyways, as soon as we get better with the economics, we get to the social issues.
I’m in your corner guys/gals, just let him do his job. Leave him a message and he’ll get back with you.
Report thisBy Truthdig Webmaster, June 17, 2009 at 1:05 pm Link to this comment
To Xntrk and everynobody—Please refer to our FAQ page on commenting http://www.truthdig.com/about/comment_policy/, which offers solutions to the problems you may be experiencing, as well as instructions on how to register and log in. Please report any technical issues to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address); a Truthdig staff member will respond to you and resolve the issue.
Report thisBy Xntrk, June 17, 2009 at 12:28 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
1960 flashbacks. Read some of the letters ot the editor from those days, substitute Blacks for Gays, and many of these comments would fit right in.
I am one of that group Rachel Maddow refered to as those being interested in Civil Liberties for all, rather than a member of the Gay/Lesbian voting block. Reading the language of the Justice Department’s brief defending DOMA, goes far beyond simply defending this law. It is insulting and demeaning. Note: Her interview with with Howard Dean on this topic, is not posted here. Try Buzzflash.
It would be invigorating to live in a country that HAD equal rights for all. Instead, we give the concept lip-service, and then spy on migrants, arrest Muslims for who they are rather then for what they have done, and continue to segregate our minorities, using money rather than skin color to achieve the same result.
everynobody: I read your post about being unable to register and having posts deleted. I too have the same problem. FYI, if you are still checking this site, I think I know why. The program used to censor posts is only looking for certain words. Like most machines, it doesn’t understand context. Too much to expect humans to do the work in this day and age! Don’t bother to use the Contact Us approach. Apparently, humans don’t reply to the e-mails either…
Report thisBy Arlanthe, June 17, 2009 at 9:58 am Link to this comment
BobbieBoo- What does “same sex marriage” have to do with “sex”? Nothing. The word “sex” has multiple definitions, it is a demographic descriptor and a physical act. Same sex marriage refers to demographics, not the act of sex. It is inappropriate to talk about any kind of sex at work, but I have a clue that when people talk about same sex marriage at your work, they are talking about laws, and rights, and tax benefits, and privileges extended to married couples, and court decisions, and protests. I’ll bet none of them have talked about the actual physical act, and if they do, it is inappropriate.
These are two different concepts that happen to have the same word “sex” in it. People- gay or straight can get married and not have sex. They are called platonic marriages and happen more than you think, yet we still call it same sex marriage, because that is what it is demographically referred do. Would you prefer same-gender marriage? Also, people can talk about the legal implications of the rights and benefits extended to the contract of marriage, people can talk about all sorts of issues related to the legal term “same sex marriage”. It has nothing to do with the act itself.
If I talk about the fact my dog had a litter of four puppies, all of the same sex, does that mean I am talking about bestiality at work? If on a customer survey I ask for the sex of the respondent, does that mean I am harassing them? Open a dictionary.
Also, Sunshine- it isn’t that easy, you have to be married or registered domestic partners, which is a legal contract and full of obligations. To that end, people get married all the time for benefits. I used to work for the San Diego County Recorders office issuing marriage licenses and performing civil ceremonies. People get married for benefits all the time- such as to get someone into the country, and particularly in the military, to get into military housing or get military benefits. This was a weekly occurrence in San Diego and people admitted it openly (especially Navy corpsmen…). Religiously, marriage may be sacred, but civilly, it is just a contract.
Report thisBy Not A Democrat, June 17, 2009 at 9:11 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Seriously, this is not cool. My HUSBAND can’t even get insurance on his wife and child, but yet a homosexual can call thier bf/gf a “partner” and get benefits on a FEDERAL level. The founding principals of this country is going down the toilet. Welcome to the Obama era.
Report thisBy Sunshine1167, June 17, 2009 at 4:25 am Link to this comment
So, if I am straight and I have a boyfriend I can not have him on my insurance. But if I am gay, I can call my girlfriend my “partner” and she gets all benefits…very interesting!
Report thisBy johannes, June 17, 2009 at 3:32 am Link to this comment
Their have to be, homo’s and lesbians in your redaction,they keep hammering on it, we know they excists, but why all the time advertise them, lots of people think still about them, as dirty and having sex on an onnaturel way, some say even that they are born with some perversity in them.
I think a subject like this needs time and has to be explained, but not pushing it through their throats, that creates enemy’s and hate.
Plus lots of people want to keep marriage clean and for men and woman, a wedding dress is stil some thing very special, also the wedding ring, it are old costums in our society, and most people want to hold it like this.
This dont mean that people want to do harm to other thinking and living people, but they want to hold this old costums as they are, outside the sexworld.
Report thisBy marlen e, June 17, 2009 at 1:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Gays cant win through voters, Gays cant win at the Supreme Court, Gays cant win with Catholics, Gays cant win with Black Churches. Hispanics will vote against Gays since they are Catholics. The White Evangelist is getting ballots ready, So they find a President who they think is their slave to do in 5 months, what they could not do in 16 years. Which Proves, the Whole Gay thing is about WHITE SUPREMACY AND GAYS WANT SUPREMACY TO PUSH THEIR AGENDA IN SCHOOLS.
Report thisBy hippie4ever, June 16, 2009 at 10:26 pm Link to this comment
and I heard that Thomas Jefferson treated his slaves well, rarely whipping them and ensuring a healthy diet.
Report thisBy KDelphi, June 16, 2009 at 9:06 pm Link to this comment
Throw a minor “bone” to each group of contituents…
Report this