Barrack Obama's stance about same sex marriage not being legal on the federal level but allowed to form civil unions and have equal rights is ridiculous. As president, I believe that he shouldn't be saying that one view isn't allowed but allowing a similar view. Either all civil unions and same sex marriage should be illegal or legal, not one or the either. Personally, I believe that same sex marriages should be allowed because it does nothing to people. It's just two people in love that deserve the same marital rights and equal rights as every other couple in love.
After reading Michael Nava and Robert Dawidoff's article called "The Case For Gay Marriages," I agree with what they are trying to say and the message they have in the article that gays and lesbians just want the right to marry for the same reasons that other American couples want to get married. Barrack Obama may respond by saying that yes, because they are Amercian's they deserve the same rights as every other couple, however, being from his religious past he would not agree with making same sex marriage legal and would be looked as a hypocrit by many Americans.
I completely agree with what you are saying here. Same-sex marriages do nothing to harm other Americans, and if anything it will help. No matter what anyone says, if gays and lesbians are not able to get married then they do not have all the same rights as other people. Not only is this unequal from the human standpoint, but it also hurts them financially because married couples receive tax breaks, as well as many other financial benefits that civil unions do not qualify for. Not being allowed to get married also creates less stability for them, and makes it difficult for them to become parents. I think you’re right when you state that Obama’s stance is ridiculous. It makes him look somewhat hypocritical and it takes away some credibility. Overall you had good points in your post.
ReplyDeleteIt looks like many of us are coming to the same conclusion. Obama is trying to gain footing with all facets of voters however he is not making a solid commitment at the same time. He is able to agree with an issue while skirting the main objectives. Same-sex marriage proponents want equality at state and federal level, not a president that just agrees with it. I believe that many of his words have not led to enough action. Our whole country is in limbo, with job creation, equality law, education, budget and the war in Afghanistan because he will not make any hard line choices. He has to choose a side rather than trying to please everyone
ReplyDeleteI also agree with your notion that Obama should make one concrete decision and not play in-between on the idea of same-sex marriages. However, recently he has come out and changed his stance towards this topic. He is now supporting gay and lesbian marriages, but whether he will make efforts to leagalize them on a federal level is still doubtful. I feel that the reason he has recently been in a limbo is due to the separation of the nation on this topic. If he simply chooses a side he will lose a significant amount of voters. By staying neutral he meets the demands of both parties in a way and minimizes his loss of votes, which is his main goal. overall, I enjoyed reading your post. I can feel your emotions on this topic jumping at me by way of your selective word choice.
ReplyDeleteI am just another person agreeing with you! I think that you hit this idea spot on! I completely agree that same sex marriage is not hurting anyone and there is no reason that there should even be a questioning. This is just my own opinion but I think that since Obama is President he should not put his own religious beliefs into how he runs the United States. He is supposed to be for the people and not necessarily for himself. I am not saying that you are wrong I just think that it is not fair for him to judge based off of his own personal beliefs when he is supposed to lead everyone not just a certain group.
ReplyDelete