"I believe marriage is an institution for the union of a man and a woman."

[last1standing]

-Bill Clinton 1996

Since someone else decided to spread a little hatred based on Obama's personal beliefs, I think it's only fair to bring up the beliefs of the man who signed The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) into law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act

And remember, folks, Hillary says she was involved in EVERY decision Bill made and deserves credit for EVERYTHING. I'm giving her full credit on this.

[Bright Eyes]

1. "Marriage has got historic, religious and moral content that goes back to the beginning of time,

"Marriage has got historic, religious and moral content that goes back to the beginning of time, and I think a marriage is as a marriage always has been, between a man and a woman." - Hillary Clinton, opposing same-sex marriages, quoted in The New York Daily News.

http://lesbianlife.about.com/od/lesbianactivism/p/HillaryClinton.htm

[last1standing]

6. Yet Obama is trashed nonstop by some for saying the same thing.

At least he wasn't involved in putting homophobia on the books.

[havocmom]

2. If she insists on counting HIS administration as HER experience, she gets it warts & all

K & R

[SoonerPride]

3. I never forgave them on DOMA. It was a crime.

That shit still pisses me off

[lojasmo]

21. It was a sad day for me

When Paul Wellstone voted for that fucking thing.

How did Russ Feingold vote?

[last1standing]

22. Feingold voted "Nay".

Wellstone was a great senator and a great man, but he wasn't perfect, just like Feingold who has made his own mistakes in my opinion. I think it's best to remember him for the good he did.

[TheDonkey]

47. Kerry voted "nay"

[lojasmo]

60. Good, thanks.

Paul was a great man. I DO remember him for the good.

[JerseygirlCT]

53. Me too. nt

[baldguy]

4. She takes all the credit for everything thats "good" i.e.: that polls well

And takes none of the blame for everything thats "bad" i.e.: that don't poll well.

[Alcibiades]

19. But DOMA continues to poll well

Among the "hard-working Americans -- white Americans" who are the Clintons' base. You know, people who matter.

[closeupready]

5. YEPPER. That's what he said. And Hillary

would give him keys to the White House once again. :mad: No, thanks.

[pingzing58]

7. This argument is mute. As a person who donated to her campaign - she's out of the pic. now. So

let's get our nominee elected! Go Dems Go! Make the world a better place for our children!

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. I wish it was mute.

But I'll settle for it being moot.

[last1standing]

11. It's not moot here until people stop attacking the nominee.

This thread is here only to show that the person who posted a thread with Obama saying the same thing was just trying to stir up hatred.

[ccharles000]

8. Both of them are against marriage equality.

[last1standing]

12. Sadly, yes.

However, they are both FOR giving the GLBT more rights than any repub in the country.

[msallied]

25. It's a crippling handicap for most people of that generation.

Only our children will be able to fix it, sadly.

[last1standing]

30. I think the time is coming sooner than that.

The states are dividing much like the old slave states did. As culture, people, and most importantly, jobs flock to the states that allow people to live free and happily, the states with entrenched bigotry (like my own state of MI) will suffer more and more. Eventually, the dam will burst and the fed will have no choice but to codify marriage equality into law. If they don't, this really could lead to a new civil war.

I know it sounds like hyperbole but once real money starts shifting to equality states, things will get interesting.

[AntiFascist]

41. My understanding is that the California ruling...

will allow out-of-state couples to get married here. If that's the case, then it could help out with tourism. Even California has been airing tourism ads.

[invictus]

10. K & R

[totodeinhere]

13. Actually, as long as they don't try to use the state to impose their views on everyone else,

anyone, including Bill Clinton, has a right to hold that personal view. What is wrong is when wacko fundies try to legislate what should be a personal view into legislation so that we are all forced to follow it whether we want to or not.

[last1standing]

16. Bill Clinton WAS a wacko fundie who tried to legislate his personal view.

Unfortunately, he succeeded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act

The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, is the commonly-used name of a federal law of the United States that is officially known as Pub. L. No. 104-199, 110 Stat. 2419 (Sept. 21, 1996) and codified at 1 U.S.C. § 7 and 28 U.S.C. § 1738C. The law has two effects.

1. No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) need treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state.
2. The Federal Government may not treat same-sex relationships as marriages for any purpose, even if concluded or recognized by one of the states.

The bill was passed by Congress by a vote of 85-14 in the Senate<1> and a vote of 342-67 in the House of Representatives<2>, and was signed by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996.

[totodeinhere]

29. I agree. He should have taken a stand and vetoed the bill even though his veto...

probably would have been overridden. And then he should have had his justice department sue to try to have the law found to be unconstitutional.

[last1standing]

34. As far as I know there's no indication that he regrets signing the bill.

So I doubt he would have wanted it any other way.

Mind you, I'd love to be corrected on that one if I'm wrong.

[tritsofme]

14. DOMA probably stopped a constitutional amendment in its tracks.

And such an amendment likely would have passed back in 1996.

[last1standing]

17. This thread is in response to one that trashed Obama for saying the same thing.

Take it up with the other poster.

[closeupready]

18. How old are you anyway, trits? 20? Well, I'm old enough to be your grandfather, and no, that's not

how it happened. Don't try spreading lies about DOMA here. Do that on other boards.

[last1standing]

24. That was the cover they used to keep the GLBT community from going berserk.

Unfortunately, it worked and we see the results today.

[closeupready]

32. We didn't go berserk, but we didn't forget, and that's why I could NEVER be eager for Hillary.

Well, one big reason among many reasons.

[last1standing]

35. Yet so many of us have flocked to Hillary and I can't understand it.

McClurkin was bad, very bad. I posted my outrage about it several times when it occurred and after, but McClurkin was only expressing his self hating views whereas the Clintons codified homophobia into law. Whether it was done because they really believe that marriage is only between a man and a woman or if they did it for political gain doesn't matter. The end result is that it was a Clinton who signed hate into federal law.

[tritsofme]

40. I don't know what that is supposed to mean.

But if you look at the polling from 1996 there was something like 80%+ in opposition to gay marriage.

Today we have progressed to the point where more or less, the nation is split, the issue is almost over.

Clinton was a pragmatist, and knew that DOMA would likely be overturned or found unconstitutional eventually. Its not that easy to scrap a constitutional amendment.

[closeupready]

44. Clinton was fooling around with a female intern, and used his support for DOMA as a means of deflect

ing criticism for that indiscretion, for the benefit of currying favor with Xtian fundies in states which were swing states.

And anyway, Lawrence v. Texas (the suit which overturned sodomy laws) hadn't yet been decided (which happened in 2002, IIRC), and sodomy laws were still in effect in 26 states (or whatever number it was). Until that happened, gay marriage wasn't even on the radar.

And another question: Did Clinton HAVE to sign the DOMA?

[tritsofme]

48. It passed with supermajorities in both houses.

His signature meant little.

[last1standing]

50. Yet he still signed it. Not a great way to back up the GLBT community.

He sold us down the river on that one and there's no way to justify his signing.

I'm not saying he was all bad or that he didn't try to do some good things for us, but he and Hillary are no better than Obama on this subject.

[closeupready]

52. Right.

n/t

[tritsofme]

55. That's a statement I would agree with.

nt

[Major Hogwash]

61. Nope, don't think so.

How many states have to approve an amendment to the Constitution - they didn't have enough then either. Not even in 1996.

[Exilednight]

64. Bullshit, the amendment would have never passed. The rethugs didn't have the votes ........

though Hillary will try to convince you otherwise and depend on peoples short term memory to fail them as usual. They threatened, Bill didn't want the fight and folded like a cheap lawn chair. Getting blood from a stone would have been easier.

[tritsofme]

65. DOMA passed with the type of numbers that would approve a constitutional amendment in Congress

To dismiss the chances of an amendment passing is to forget how different the political climate in this country was, even 12 years ago.

[David Zephyr]

15. Don't you know? She secretly opposed Bill's stance...

just like she secretly opposed Bill's NAFTA (although notes indicate otherwise)...

just like she secretly opposed Bill's welfare reform push...

just like she secretly opposed Bill's taking $80,000 from Colombia for the trade deal even though they did cash the check...

Yes, Hillary was involved in every decision that went well for Bill politically...

And guess what? She secretly opposed every decision that Bill made that turned out badly.

All of that and she dodged sniper fire, too!

[DefenseLawyer]

20. Personally I would be happy with abolishing state sanctioned "marriage" all together.

Any couple that wants to be contractually joined could do so and have it recognized and enforced by the state, anybody that then wanted to get "married" in a church or temple or along the side of the road could do so at their leisure. If some church doesn't want to offer such services to same sex couples, that's their business, but they wouldn't have a basis to inject their stance into our legal system. Just my two cents as an agnostic who got married in Vegas.

[last1standing]

23. Dare I say "The French Way"?

In France that's how they do it. Every couple has a civil union performed by a government official. Many will then have ceremony in a church but only the civil union is legally binding.

[DefenseLawyer]

27. You mean "The Freedom Way"!

We don't want nothing like they got in Yerp. :sarcasm:

[last1standing]

28. Maybe we should call it "Old Marriage" like "Old Europe".

That seemed to work when the bushies wanted to go to war. :shrug:

[msallied]

26. Hear hear!!

I've said it that way all along. It's absolutely silly that we don't do it that way!

[alphafemale]

37. I agree. As long as everyone legally has the the same rights.

The state should recognize the legal rights of two people in a civil union. It should protect them with the power of the state in those all important matters such as medical decisions, estate and child custody. It should have the power to step in to assure assets are fairly divided if such a union is dissolved.

But the state has no business telling a Unitarian minister that she cannot bless the union of a gay couple; anymore than they should tell a Catholic priest that he had to sanction the union of two people who were divorced.

[MagickMuffin]

63. Exactly what I was going to post. I'm in a 28 year Common Law "marriage"

I've know sooooooo many people who've gotten married, divorced, married, divorced, married, divorced.

What's the point, when it's so easy to marry and then find a relationship too hard and divorce so easy?.?.?

Relationships are never easy. But one must work through whatever conflicts they endure to make the marriage work, but that's HARD work.


Now there are people just getting married so they can get health care:cry:

[Doityourself]

31. It sucks for gay people. You can die for your country, but your country won't let you marry..sucks!

[last1standing]

36. They won't even let you die for your country (unless you're stop-lossed).

the GLBT community has to pay higher taxes to receive fewer rights. We are nothing better than second class citizens in this country until we are equal.

[Doityourself]

38. It sucks balls!! Just sucks! Completely unfair.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## DON'T DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our second quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Whatever you do, do not click the link below!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

39. isnt obama against gay marriage too. pot----kettle.

[totodeinhere]

42. Neither Obama nor Clinton have showed much political courage on this issue.

And of course we know why. They are afraid that the Repukes will try to politically exploit it if they come out for gay marriage. In some sections of the country such as in some southern states gay marriage remains an anathema to many voters.

[last1standing]

43. That's the point of this thread. Some idiot posted an anti-obama quote on marriate equality.

I posted this in response. It's time that some of our less informed posters knew exactly what the Clintons think of gay marriage. And what they've done to defeat equality.

[rug]

45. If your point is they both suck on this but Obama sucks less, you failed.

And you should be more cautious in throwing around the word idiot.

[last1standing]

46. You failed when you posted your propoganda thinking no one would call your on it.

And I didn't call you an idiot. I said "some idiot". If you feel that term applies to you then don't blame me.

[rug]

49. Since when is an Obama Senate speech propaganda?

His stump speeches are another matter.

And don't try to be coy. Calling any other DU poster an idiot is stupid, though typical.

[last1standing]

51. When you use it to try to stir up hatred. That's when.

As for this "Calling any other DU poster an idiot is stupid", I'll leave you to your lack of irony.

[rug]

54. Do you think a criticism of Obama's words and positions is stirring up hatred?

Especially when that position contributes to hatred.

How ironic.

You're not wrapped very tightly.

[last1standing]

56. Do you really think your grade school word twisting is going to work?

Really?

[rug]

57. In your case, I may need preschool phonics.

[last1standing]

58. I agree. This is preschool. From both of us.

Look man. I'm tired of fighting and I'm tired of the drama. I started this thread because I felt you were using an unfair quote to disparage the guy I think is going to be our nominee. Still, I shouldn't have called you an idiot and I shouldn't have gotten so wrapped up in the whole damned affair.

Seriously, I'm tired. You do what you need to do but I'm done. I'm sorry for any insults and I'm sorry I bothered at all.

Peace.

[rug]

59. Peace. I'm going to sleep too.

[Major Hogwash]

62. He won't push for overturning a law allowing it.

Now that California has decided what they think, the Feds will get involved.