Discrimination against gays alive and kicking in the 'liberal' world

[debbierlus]

Let's say that California had a referendum banning any of the following categories of people from marrying:

Catholics marrying Jews

Blacks marrying Whites

Irish marrying Italians

Fat people marrying thin people

Disabled people marrying non-disabled people...


Now, lets suppose that any of these initiatives passed and it was up to the Obama department of justice to defend the law. What do you think the response would be, say, if the blacks not marrying whites option passed? Do you think Pres Obama would get away with saying that the justice department has a protocol it must follow and defend the legislation?

Or, do you think he might get on television and say that this is horrible discrimination that he will not let his administration sanction and act in any capacity he could to expose and stop the discrimination?

Do you think he might bring in his constitutional knowledge and publicly state that the opinion of the many can't be used to deny rights to the few? Maybe an impassioned speech threading laws and ruling and the history of oppression on prime time?

The issue to me on the Obama White House is the utter lack of courage on this topic. Discrimination against the gay and lesbian community is explained away by technicalities of law instead of a impassioned stance of protecting the rights of all Americans. Even worse is the 'liberals' and 'progressives' rationalizing the administration's insulting DOJ as unrelated to Obama...He can't insert himself...

Would anyone say the same on this board, if was another group...

Blacks and whites

Short and tall

Irish and Italian...

No. Those bannings would be an outrage. But, the rights of gay individuals to marry still is accepted as a matter of acceptable public debate.

It is easy to show 'courage of conviction' when the popular tide supports that conviction. Not so much when the conviction actually requires true courage.

Obama needs to publicly state that gay marriage should be as much of an inherent right as any hetrosexual union. And, if those who would defend Obama backing down from this challenge because it is not politically expedient should hang up their badge as a liberal or progressive.

[Captain Hilts]

1. Sexism thrives among 'liberals'. nt

[bvar22]

16. self-delete

Posted other "-isms" that are alive & well among "Liberals", but deleted because I think the focus should remain sharp on this issue.

[BlueJazz]

2. "rights of gay individuals to marry still is accepted as a matter of acceptable public debate."

Not in my Book.

This is 2009 and people should start acting like it.
I never have understood the Anti-Gay thing....I mean, What the fuck difference does it make why do you Care?
Some people act like "Shitty programed" Robots....no Creativeness at all. :)

[mkultra]

27. I think the debate is more about how and less about if.

At least on this board.

[Hutzpa]

3. Like it gets better in the Neo-Con World

don't let outrage cloud your judgment, thats what I say.

[debbierlus]

5. What on earth does that have to do with anything?

[PVnRT]

8. Nothing - it's one of the two talking points they use

for anyone not wearing rose-colored glasses. It's either the "You must have wanted McCain to win" theme (or one of its variants) or "You're just bitter you don't have a pony yet" theme, including the new talking point that critics just want him to wave a magic wand and give them everything they want.

Yet according to some here, those are reasonable and logical debate tactics, as opposed to the emotional and irrational critics.

[QC]

13. I sure with the central committee would send out new talking points.

These have gotten stale.

It's almost enough to make me miss "Your concern is noted" and "ALERT AND IGNORE!1!! ALERT AND IGNORE1!!!1!"

[indigo32]

that doesn't make it any better

not by a long shot

[indigo32]

23. dupe

[indigo32]

24. dupe

[QC]

4. Here's an excellent example.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5862550&mesg_id=5862550

[masuki bance]

6. Holy shit?! nt

[QC]

7. Nothing at all surprising about it.

I figured the numbers would be a lot worse and hoped the thread would remain open.

It would have opened some eyes around here.

[muffin1]

9. OMG!

The results of that poll are horrifying and shameful.
This is frigging 2009 for chrissakes!
Discrimination is alive and well...

[QC]

10. Only straight people here were shocked by that poll.

The members of DU's dwindling GLBT community were not surprised at all.

[muffin1]

11. I knew it was bad here, but I had no idea it was that bad.

I love DU, but I will never understand the indifference to the plight of the GLBT community that I see here.

[QC]

12. I've been here since early 2001, and I have seen a lot in that time,

but I have never seen GLBT members of the site scorned the way we have been for the past year and a half or so. It's been a real surprise, even for someone as cynical as I am.

[jonnyblitz]

14. Obama worship trumps equal rights for all here and they don't

even try to hide it.

[muffin1]

15. You are so right about that!

I admire Barack Obama as much as the next person, but his stance on equal rights SUCKS.
I'm still of the opinion that he is too smart to believe in discrimination against anyone - that is, he is doing this for political reasons. But I still have to call BULLSHIT on his reasons.

He would not stand for discrimination against any other group, and he shouldn't stand for it against the GLBT community.

He needs to be taken to task on this issue.

[QC]

18. It's all about personalities now. Issues mean nothing at all anymore. n/t

[bvar22]

17. That is just plain SICK.

:puke:

[RoadRage]

19. No Offense... but 23 assholes hardly makes a "scientific poll"...

23 people out of HOW MANY DU'ERS here picked that? And you have to figure that poll was a troll magnet to begin with.. so siting 23 losers votes as "proof" of the homophobic nature of the entire site is a bit over the top if you ask me...

[QC]

20. Perhaps the responses should be made public

so we can see if it was trolls replying or not.

My suspicion is that we would find a lot of loud, longtime DUers with thousands of posts there.

[ieoeja]

21. I would have voted Environmental Issues. Your turn. n/t

[RoadRage]

25. Accuracy of News Reporting is mine..

With the web, blogs, radio, cable, TV, if you don't like or agree with the accuracy of a news sources reporting.. it's fairly simple to just go find another one. And frankly sometimes I like to watch opposing viewpoints to see how they spin things.

[QC]

26. I hated the way the poll was designed. If it wasn't deliberately divisive,

then that's an amazing coincidence.

Human rights are a seamless garment, and there is no need to pit legitimate issues against one another. I object to the premise of the poll, but I do think that it ended up being very revealing.

[ieoeja]

22. FYI: US DOJ does not defend State of California laws. n/t