Capitol Hill Blue Forums We shall overcome

Hey Steve, I agree with most of the column and I am also confused by the people who feel Obama has somehow betrayed the gay community. He was never in support of gay marriage. I like Barack Obama very much and feel like he really was the best choice but I have never worshipped him like some have.

However, Obama did say he was against Prop 8. Warren is all over Prop 8. This is the problem I have with this choice. I felt punched in the gut on election night and having Warren give the invocation at Obama's inauguration just added to that pain. Like the author, I question having a religious invocation at a government ceremony anyway.

I also don't like the way this is being defended, as if Obama is being fair and balanced by giving voice to all sides of this issue. It reminds me of the people who consider the creationism/evolution debate as valid. One side is based on fact and the other opinion & faith. They are not equal. My being gay is not open for discussion. I am gay. Period. Faith and beliefs should never trump my reality.

I'm sure Rick Warren is a swell guy. He is just dead wrong on this issue.

Exactly what rights are they after next?

Most of the same groups also oppose civil unions/domestic partnerships, would seek to re-impose laws banning oral and anal sex, cross-dressing, hate crime laws and employment discrimination laws. Do you remember what Prop 6 was all about?

You may not know it, but within my lifetime states have criminalized dancing with the same gender, gathering in bars which cater to gays and a whole host of such laws.

That is the religious right's agenda.

I doubt that they can't push much farther, especially with the Supreme Courts knocking down any "win" they might have at the polls. To me, this whole thing is just a waste of money since it always ends up on the desks of the supreme courts and they'll make the final decision.

Seems to be a pretty cavalier attitude about my rights, Kap.

I'm not sure it is so cavalier, my friend. I think that Kap's point is that Prop 8 probably represents the apex of anti-gay sentiment, and that resort to the courts is inevitable. I see it more as a statement of fact than of intent. I join with those that are concerned about the impact the success of Prop 8 and the implications that it may have for other rights, as well as your concern about the reimposition of limitations that had previously (and in some States, still does) existed in the laws that are discriminatory and anti-humanistic. I am personally tired of religious agendas taking precedence over legal rights and I am encouraged that Obama is someone who believes in those rights. I think there is a significant segment of the majority who believe in equality but see the debate over "marriage" as semantics -- I happen to disagree, but it is a reasonable position and persuasion is what will be required to change it.

I'd like to weigh in here and say that my feelings about the Rick Warren thing are mirrored by Jeffro's. I think it's a bad choice for those same reasons although I've always been confused about (and disagreed with) the whole swearing in on a bible/invocation thing altogether.
That's just plain wrong in my opinion, tradition or no.

I'd also like to agree with those who are startled by the surprise of some liberals over Obama's opposition to gay marriage. He never hid that. It is another reason why I didn't vote for him.

I have not seen it being defended that way. If you have a source or two to demonstrate that point of view, I'd be glad to read them and react with similar revulsion. The defense I am seeing - and which I agree with - is that Mr. Obama is hardly a smidgen less of a Fundamentalist than his predecessor, the primary difference being that he is an adherent to the Social Gospel whereas the self-proclaimed Compassionate Conservative was in fact not. The defense I am seeing is that it isn't reasonable to make unfounded assumptions about his position on the issue and then hold his feet to the fire for not living up to those assumptions.

Hold his feet to the fire for the position he actually holds, yes. That position being that he intends to keep his religion and his governance separate.

It will be much easier for a friend to open his mind to that possibility than for an adversary.

Again, it is easier to be sanguine from a distance. I have talked with those on the religious right, have read their materials, and have watched ballot measures go on to victory taking away the kind of fundamental rights I listed.

I do not always want to depend on a court for the defense of my rights. Most courts are not sympathetic and it takes half a lifetime to get to a final decision.

Those rights we now enjoy in SOME states have been hard fought. I have been at it since 1970, and at no time did it appear reasonable to me to sit back and wait for litigation to honor my human rights.

I do not plan to do so now. As one who can remember vividly being stopped by the sheriff for walking a main street in West Hollywood holding my boy friend's hand as recently as 1976, I take nothing for granted.

I agree with Phil - why must we gays always have to experience the tyranny of the majority? Just leave us alone. We leave you alone.