Ensign Edison, Obama’s personal views are flaws insofar as they are against same-sex marriage. That is unfortunate. But how is it a compromise to vote for him if his every action is against the direction of legislating those personal views into public law? When making voting decisions, I (try to) only care about people’s personal beliefs insofar as they impinge on their actions in office.
If you truly don’t mind that he thinks Jesus doesn’t want us to have equal rights (so strongly that even his personal devotion to equal rights doesn’t make him question this), or don’t worry that the pandering everyone says he’s doing when he says that isn’t going to end up cutting the other way as a result, then there’s no compromise for you, no. (But even if there were, I’ve repeatedly said it’s not necessarily wrong, and may sometimes be necessary, to compromise on such issues.)
You do have a valid point about voter responsibility, but there was a bit more than just that at play in this election. One of my oldest friends is married to a Mormon. His father-in-law has a good amount of pull in the church. When one of the other members of his church found out he was voting against Prop 8, he was warned that he might lose his Temple Recommend as a result. He told them to go fuck themselves (well, not in so many words - he is a Mormon, after all) and they backed down, but I imagine there’s a fair number of Mormons who, under a similar threat, wouldn’t show the same intestinal fortitude. And with the vote as close as it is, that just might have been enough to tip the balance.
I’m so very sorry. It’s not much, but I take comfort in knowing that before too long these people who supported this will be in the same position as those who opposed intergration. Like story said, gay rights will win. That’s not a maybe, only a when. Here’s to hoping the time in the interim won’t be as painful as it has potential to be.
By people who are scum. Vermin who voted to forbid a right to homosexuals that they DO allow to, say, serial killers - which rather shows what their opinion is of homosexuals. This vote demonstrates once again the vileness of the American public.
Honest ? So what ? Honestly evil is still evil. It will fail because they are all - every single person who voted for this - bigots.
it failed because the majority of voters are bigots. I don’t care in the slightest why.
No, it’s not. He’s just a moderate right winger who will slow our slide to fascism and/or destruction a little, at best. He’s no “progressive”.
Don’t you realize, though, that then the homophobic bigots would just turn around and use that as a way to argue that those dirty faggots really did destroy decent, Christian marriages? I see what you’re saying, but I don’t think that would work.
groman-notice that all three of those videos had comments disabled? Hmmm… (Sadly, my father used to belong to Knights of Columbus*. Damn bastards-so this is what they’ve become?)
To my friends in California-right now, my heart goes out to you-I can’t imagine how horrid this has to be, and I wish you all the strength and luck I possibly can to fight this thing.
Actually, I’m going to change what I said. To be honest, there is a compromise here; I’d prefer a candidate who openly stated his unabashed support for equal marriage rights. But I’d prefer lots of things, things which would prevent any candidate from coming anywhere near office as it stands. Anything short of perfection is a compromise, yeah, but so what? Perfection is never on the table. So… whatever. For me, Obama was a compromise in many ways. But on this specific issue, it’s just about the tiniest possible one; poor pandering words (even quite possibly sincere), but necessary ones, and good actions to more than offset them. So, what’s your point? Let us (those who felt Obama was a compromise, those who felt he wasn’t, those who supported McCain, all of us) stew in our outrage in peace.
Ihavemademypoint clear over and over in this thread. Including in the post you replied to, though via an edit so it’s possible you missed that I said (yet again) I didn’t think compromise was bad, but was disputing the claim that no compromise was made. I do appreciate that you took the time to respond to my points instead of just attacking me, and I hope Jodi won’t be too hard on you for taking the apparently outrageous stance that compromise is involved in choosing a candidate.
I hope it gets resolved too, and I also would like for government to finally realize they need to stay the hell out of our personal business. For those who think this was a good thing, here’s a STFU GTFO DIAF and it comes from the heart.
Ah, yes. I had a brief moment of ‘hope’ last night. Now I’ve remembered that the majority of Americans are hateful, bigoted, worthless smears of shit who only care what Pastor Fuckface says the Big Boomy Skyvoice wants. I’ve remembered why I loathe people who willingly associate with religious institutions. I’ve remembered that if I should want to get married I’d probably have to move to Massachusetts.
The only thing that has changed, in a broad view, is that instead of making people second-class citizens based on race we’re now doing it based on sexual orientation.
To people who think this’ll be fixed in the next few years: it won’t. How long did it take from the founding of this country until blacks were treated as equals? And they had sit-ins, they had hundreds of thousands of people marching on Washington, they had leaders like MLK and Jesse Jackson, and perhaps most importantly they had riots. The gay rights marriage lacks any leadership or real movement; it’s a bunch of lawyers sitting in a conference room.
For fuck’s sake, we should all - Americans, all of us - be sickened with our complacency.
Thing is, Edison, the way you’ve defined it, a compromise is *always *involved in choosing *any *candidate. Either you intend something specific by pointing out *this *compromise on *this *candidate to *these *people in *this *thread, or your statement is a meaningless tautology. Despite your insistence otherwise, it sure appears as though you’re trying, albeit in a characteristically passive-aggressive way, to pick a fight with those who generally support your cause (but not with the fervor you’d like).
But no doubt I’m wrong again, completely off the mark. Just like everyone else in this thread and several others in which we’ve done a similar dance.
Once again, as I’ve now said countless times and even linked to several examples of, I was responding to the claim that there’s no compromise at all. I have also repeatedly affirmed your point above. I hope Jodi, who was screaming at me that there was no compromise and nobody else thinks so, isn’t too hard on you either.
I was greeted this morning by a voicemail left at around 7pm last night basically saying the same things that this bullshit mailer said, using actual soundbytes from Obama interviews. It made me want to scream.
I had the strongest urge to jump the curb and run over all the prop 8 supporters toting their signs on practically every corner in my neighborhood for the past few weeks. I’m wishing I’d actually done it now (the fantasy at least makes me feel a little better).
Vienna Teng’s song “City Hall” always made me cry, but it will just make me cry harder now. Don’t let them take it away again. :mad:
See, this nicely explains your problem: If you think for one second I was “screaming” or “shrieking” at you, you clearly just perceive and define things differently from the rest of us, and should be treated with the same tolerance as anyone else suffering from a cognitive disability.
Are you aware that the use of caps is generally considered ‘yelling’ online, and that you used them repeatedly in your vitriol-laced posts to me, Jodi?
