In 1993 over 50% of states had amendments banning sam sex marriage. And i remember

[kelliekat44]

Last edited Tue Oct 27, 2015, 11:56 AM - Edit history (1)

the talk shows covering a lot of discussions about a Constitutional amendments for or against same sex marriage. It seems fair to say that there must have been some concerns about opening up the Constitutional amendment process on this. Hell there was talk about an amendment on balancing the budget. Most here must have forgotten how rampant the RW evangelicals were back then.

http://www.pewforum.org/2009/07/09/a-contentious-debate-same-sex-marriage-in-the-us/

[Skidmore]

1. Yes, context is important.

And so do people and their attitudes. We take in ideas and knowlege and incoporate them into our worldview. I know my attitudes toward many issues now are not the same as a younger me held. We hold for ourselves the right to change and grow. It always puzzles me as to why public figures are not allowed to do the same.

[Sheepshank]

27. I'd like to expand on that just a little....

And this is not a new thought to me, but one that isn't recognized.

We elect persons to protect our way of life and to promote betterment and to provide assistance. They should NOT ever be directing goverment to implement their own personal ideals and standards. They should be implementing policy as a representative of their constutuency. If that constituency changes, they politician should also be changing to reflect their changing constituency.

If the public has overwhelmingly changed it's positions, and wants sensible gun control, the politicians should be working towards that goal. If the consituency overwhelmingly has changed their attitude on same sex marriage, the politician should be moving in that same direction along with the constituency. If the constituency wants health care for all, the Republicans should not have stood in the way of what a majority of the nation wanted to see happen.

Our biggest problems in government seem to be those politicians that do no evolve along with their consituency and try and showcase front and center their own personal desires and that of a small vocal minority.

It is for that reason I will never denigrade those leaders who have shown some ability to read what the people want at that time and are willing to make the effort "to make it so".

[Warren Stupidity]

2. Another post supporting the theory that tossing lgbtq rights under the bus was supporting lgbtq

rights and not, as it most obviously was, supporting clinton election opportunities.

[Skidmore]

4. No, it isn't

Last edited Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:50 AM - Edit history (1)

The times in which we live provide context for what happens on any nation's stage. Were you not paying attention to what was happening in the nation then? We share the nation with peoples who hold all sorts of beliefs and demands. The sum total of people in positions of power is not limited to a president, as the past seven years have so underscored. It looks as though some are hellbent on travelling down the same road of ignoring the importance of the makeup of congress and its rules. How do you think the right has been so successful? Because they are warm and fuzzy? Because they don't wield power when they have it, and by any means?

There are values and dreams we all share, and then there is a reality on the ground of what is possible within the time and with the resources and zeitgiest. Women and peoples of color have been fighting for equal rights for centuries. Guess what. We are still fighting. We know who the enemy is and we know which avenues need to be opened. I get tired of the concrete thinking.

[JaneyVee]

15. Ironically, DOMA paved the way for Obergefell.

[William769]

31. Was not tossing lgbtq rights under the bus, it was actualy saving lgbtq rights to fight another

day.

I was at the march on Washington in 1993, which is more than I can say for a lot of people quarterbacking Monday morning.

[Warren DeMontague]

3. Not everyone sold out their principles to the so-called "values voters"

it's easy to do the right thing when it's popular. Leadership is doing it no matter what.

[boston bean]

6. If we had a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage

the supreme court decisions you saw this year, would not have occurred.

The republicans in that congress introduced many constitutional amendments (prayer in school, term limits, flag desecration, balanced budget), and were pushing for DOMA. You think if they didn't get it, they would stop there?

This country was against same sex marriage in 1996 and it probably would have been easy to pass, since so many states were already doing so on their own.

Secondly, Bernie admitted last night on Rachels show that he was against same sex marriage in Vermont in 2006 for political reasons.

https://archive.org/stream/defenseofmarriag1996unit/defenseofmarriag1996unit_djvu.txt

[BooScout]

7. Don't confuse the issue with facts....

Facts and the truth seem to have no place on this forum anymore.

[iandhr]

23. You are quite correct

[Warren DeMontague]

28. You're right: I find the argument that opposing same sex marriage somehow saved us from the people

who opposed same sex marriage, a bit "confusing".

[Bluenorthwest]

11. Well the OP, as recently as November 2014, has blamed LGBT for election losses:

"The openness and brazenness of the LBGT agenda and the media flaunting of gay marriages all across the country cost Dems dearly and threatens to do so in the future."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025764803#post45

So that's what you are finding so agreeable, that is the point of view being expressed here, disrespect, disregard and utter denigration of LGBT people.

[boston bean]

13. My agreeing that a constitutional amendment against SSM was quite possible

means nothing of the sort. What are you trying to do here?

[Bluenorthwest]

14. I'm pointing out that this OP has nasty things to say about LGBT in the past and thus her rantings

on this issue should be rejected, this is not acceptable. Flaunting our rights? I'd rather be called a shiny object, dig? Trash talking minority groups is not cool. LGBT included.

Any poster who wrote what she wrote about any other minority group would not be here to make another OP about that minority group. It's that simple.

I'm not the one in the wrong here.

[boston bean]

17. And you choose my post to do this, for what reason?

It has absolutely NOTHING to do with me.

[Bluenorthwest]

20. You are chatting away in this thread as if it was legitimate. I see Hillary supporters constantly

defining Bernie supporters using some Tweet they read or by pointing at DUers like Stockholm Man as if we were all the same. So turnabout is fair play. If the Hillary crowd is going to say 'Bernie supporters are defined by their worst' and get no push back from other Hillary folks, then they should be afforded the same treatment.
Look at this tread, 'they don't like facts or nuance' but when I point out the facts about the OP you get very touchy. Who does not like the facts or the nuance?
Fact, the OP is calloused toward LGBT persons. Fact, her cohort never calls her out on it and she is permitted to make OP's about LGBT issues all the time 'for Hillary'.
So I'm just playing by the rules others are using toward me. And I will not stop employing those rules until the bullshit attacks cease.

[boston bean]

21. As if what is legitimate? answer that please.

I stated I thought that a constitutional amendment was in the cards.

You take from that whatever you want, but what you are attempting to insinuate is pretty lame imho.

[Bluenorthwest]

22. As if the OP is a legitimate contributor to discussions about my rights.

You are in fact defending her assertion. She's got a history. Others in the thread are carrying on about facts and nuance and characterizing of Bernie supporters is rife on this site 'I know what I see on Twitter'. Well, I know what I see on DU and it is owned by all who stand aside in apathy or worse those who defend the assertions of those who say bigoted shit all over DU. Flaunting our rights. How would that sort of language fly if applied to any other minority group? If a poster wrote that about another minority would you enter their threads to argue from their side? No, you would not.

I pointed out why I take issue with the OP doing this and you, you took issue with me for pointing out the facts. Now you know the facts.

Straight people, they suddenly care about DOMA. It looks like what it is.

[boston bean]

25. Ridiculous. You have a problem with the OP take it up with them.

I have no control over it.

And I will continue to state an opinion, no matter how you want to try to frame this.

It's lame. Really, expect better of you.

[kelliekat44]

30. Not to worry...he's just my regular stalker on this board. Read my November post for yourself

to see the point I was trying to make...from first hand experience being surrounded by homophobes in my family and among family of friends..

[Warren DeMontague]

29. I don't think that splitting the difference on opposing marriage equality, prevented an amendment.

I think that what kept a constitutional amendment from happening is that the bar for a constitutional amendment is set pretty high, and even at their peak the power of the so-called "values voters" was vastly overinflated by the media.

If anything, a good chunk of the power they did wield at the time may have been due to the lack of inspiring, morally clear (and by this I mean, displaying moral clarity on not just support for equality, but things like opposing the iraq war, etc) leadership on our side of the aisle.

[SunSeeker]

5. K & R

[99Forever]

8. Still trying to spin the truth away I see.

That's the trouble with being a follower instead of a leader, especially in this age where The Facts are readily available to virtually everyone. Political convenience isn't quite so easy to pull off these days.

WE SEE YOU.

And we know what you are doing.

[Skidmore]

9. Since when is placing events in historical perspective

spinning? Reality does exist and historical context is important. All politicians negotiate issues, even Sanders. Nothing exists in a vaccum.

[99Forever]

10. Spin spin spin...

.. it's what weathervanes do best.

You really think you're fooling people, huh?

[Skidmore]

12. Not trying to.

So much for the reality-based left.

[99Forever]

18. Bullshit.

It's EXACTLY what you are trying to do.

And failing.

What you and Hillary would have us believe, is that doing the RIGHT THING on a HUGE number of issues, changes due to the prevailing political winds.

That's what people with no ethics or moral character who hunger for power do.

[JaneyVee]

16. Avoiding context and nuance is what Berniebro's do best.

[Bluenorthwest]

19. What I notice as a gay Bernie supporter is that the Hillary folks miss all the best arguments they

could be making and instead type juvenile name calling in discussions about the rights of minorities. Pure class.

I note that none of you have the ability to contextualize the times preceding DOMA, to the point that none of you seem to understand that part of the reason Clinton got so much pressure around LGBT issues is that he tried to do the right things and in many cases did. Bill followed two Republicans who had basically ignored the AIDS crisis, tens of thousands were dying each year in the US. Clinton doubled funding and many other things. 1996 we got DOMA. 1996 was also the first year that AIDS deaths decreased instead of increasing, people started living longer and infection rates began to decline.

So DOMA aside 1996 was a year of victory. Yeah. But these Hillary boosters affecting great concern about the issues and the times can't even manage to make those arguments and that says much.

How many times will Straight DUers discuss LGBT issues in the 90's without mentioning AIDS? As many times as it serves them to do so, that's how many.

[pinebox]

24. You're candidate supported DOMA

There's no defending that. There's no excuse for that. None. Own it and move on. Hillary was wrong. Period. Full stop.

[ibegurpard]

32. this particular talking point is offensive and lame

Please report back to Camp Weathervane HQ to try again.

[Fearless]

33. The fear was from US LGBTer's NOT from the Clinton Administration. Stop making things up.