(no subject)

[judecorp]

Barack Obama, June 5, 2006

And I should say that personally, I do believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Just in case y'all think he's a friend to the gays.

Comments

[judecorp.livejournal.com]

You're right - Clinton isn't pro- same-sex marriage, either. However, she hasn't (that I can find) come out and said that she personally believes marriage is for a man and a woman. Instead, she said that she was in favor of civil unions for NY but if the majority wanted same-sex marriage, then so be it.

[checkingmypulse.livejournal.com]

Hillary Clinton and Gay Marriage: Some gay and lesbian voters don't feel like Hillary Clinton has done enough to support gay and lesbian rights, while others believe she is the best candidate for gay and lesbian issues. Clinton opposes gay marriage but supports civil unions between members of the same sex. During her husband's administration, she supported the Defense of Marriage Act, a law preventing the federal recognition of same-sex marriage.
"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.

However, in October 2006 Hillary Clinton was quoted by 365gay.com as saying,"I believe in full equality of benefits, nothing left out. From my perspective there is a greater likelihood of us getting to that point in civil unions or domestic partnerships and that is my very considered assessment."

[judecorp.livejournal.com]

So what do YOU think about all of this?

p.s. I love your Juno icon. :)

[checkingmypulse.livejournal.com]

I think I wish Kucinich would take over the world!!!!


Thanks:)

[judecorp.livejournal.com]

Ooh, me too!!! :)

[eeka13.livejournal.com]

She did say that she supports the rights of families to ask that their kids can be yanked out of public school classes any time there's discussion of same-sex couples. I find that almost more damaging -- giving our kids the message that the school supports people in viewing our families as a taboo subject.

[judecorp.livejournal.com]

I am kind of wishy-washy on this. I mean, if we send the message that parents have to keep kids in school no matter what, does that mean that the vegetarian/vegan families can't opt out of dissection anymore? Because that's something that I think should still be available.

[eeka13.livejournal.com]

Different kind of opting out. We people from non-animal-harming families still have to learn the skill that's being taught (which is that animals have parts, where the parts go, what they look like) -- we just have the right not to personally engage in a specifically forbidden practice. We still have to find a mutually agreeable way to learn the skill that the school wants to be taught.

It wouldn't have been right if I'd been exempted from learning animal anatomy all together. Or if I'd been removed from class any time it was mentioned that some people kill animals. The first amendment should only allow exceptions when a lesson specifically asks someone to engage in a forbidden practice. No one's religion forbids them from knowing that there are different kinds of families (or knowing that animals are killed, or knowing the words to different prayers used around the world, or being in the same room as people pledging allegiance to a flag.)

So, if people object to their kid reading King and King, they need to prove that 1) they consistently practice a religious belief system that specifically forbids members from hearing about the existence of same-sex couples and 2) they have another way that they're willing to have their children learn about the required curriculum, which is that some families have same-sex parents.

Obviously, they can't do this. In the David Parker decision, the courts pretty much said that the Parkers and their cohorts don't actually demonstrate a religious belief that forbids knowing about the existence of same-sex families, particularly given that the people involved in the uproar are people who talk about gay people a lot more than most gay people do. And they also ruled that they couldn't opt out of something that's so basic to elementary school curriculum (learning that there are all different kinds of people in the world).