Support NeoGAF

[Gaborn]

What kind of fucked up comparison is this? You're comparing the removal of rights with giving of rights, they're not the same thing, not even close.

Same principle. If civil unions are equality what does it matter if one group of people have civil unions and another has marriage? What' the DIFFERENCE? that's what equality MEANS. If there is a difference then civil unions are not equality.

 

[Xisiqomelir]

Which makes me repeat my question. Do you believe if some random state decided to take away marriage rights from blacks and interracial couples in favor of giving them only civil unions that Obama would support or oppose it and what rationale would he use?

14th Amendment?

 

[thekad]

That's NOT what Obama thinks though, is it? See, I believe the danger in Obama on the issue is in part the rhetoric he uses to convince people of his position. First, it's probably wise to assume people gravitate more towards moderate positions, if you define marriage equality at one end, and a constitutional ban on SSM at the other, the moderate position is probably Obama's. The PROBLEM is that when you couch rhetoric such as he is within a framework of "equal rights" RATHER THAN presenting it as a STEP towards equal rights you're saying that with civil unions you're not moving in the direction of equality, you're claiming that if you go with civil unions you have NO NEED to go forward. The entire purpose of marriage equality is to make the case that marriage equality is the ultimate goal. Obama is undercutting that with his belief that we only need to give gays the legal rights and can withhold the title just from gays.

Did you just completely erase our entire conversation of slavery from your head. Abolishing slavery was the FINAL STEP. Hell, Lincoln himself said so. Then the next step was the final step. Then the next. Are all libertarians allergic to history books?

Which makes me repeat my question. Do you believe if some random state decided to take away marriage rights from blacks and interracial couples in favor of giving them only civil unions that Obama would support or oppose it and what rationale would he use?

What? That's not how civil rights movements work in democratic nations. They don't go backward, they go forward.

 

[Barrett2]

The light from Cindy's legs is blinding...

 

[TDG]

You know what, I feel like fighting about gay marriage with Gaborn today. Fighting with gaborn is fun. (no sarcasm)

Which makes me repeat my question. Do you believe if some random state decided to take away marriage rights from blacks and interracial couples in favor of giving them only civil unions that Obama would support or oppose it and what rationale would he use?

If I may answer the question, I'd say that Obama would oppose that, because he believes that marriage is between a man and a woman, and the right to marry should not be taken away from couples.

 

[WickedAngel]

Guess which one was involved in a chemical spill.

 

[Gaborn]

14th Amendment?

then what's his rationale to deny marriage to gay couples? I understand why equality works, and I understand the constitutional ammendment position which I disagree with, but I don't understand the position that it's ok to deny gays marriage but wouldn't be ok to deny some other group marriage in favor of another relationship you're calling equality because you're hiding your bigotry.

TDG - that's actually a fair response, but it also outlines clearly why Obama is a threat to gays getting marriage equality.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

google that link, and hit the "cached" link

Thanks Qwertybob and Nabs. I learned something new today. :lol

 

[UltimaKilo]

I don't think the death of Tim Russert really hit me until I read this. Holy crap, how I would have loved to see that interview.

Well I'll say it again: damn I miss Tim Russert. He would have loved this political race! He didn't even get to see that it would be Obama as the nominee!

 

[WickedAngel]

Same principle. If civil unions are equality what does it matter if one group of people have civil unions and another has marriage? What' the DIFFERENCE? that's what equality MEANS. If there is a difference then civil unions are not equality.

In terms of the federal government, neither side should have access to marriage because of the religious associations behind the term. The government is supposed to be neutral. Civil union is neutral (As a phrase); marriage isn't.

I can't believe you're still having this same argument, regardless.

 

[Stinkles]

She's certainly got an uphill battle at this point, with all the scandal and media backlash, but she lives or dies based on how she fares tomorrow and in that debate.

.

Problem is that nowadays when a candidate for whom we have low expectations does even a mediocre job, that in itself is celebrated.

 

[harSon]

then what's his rationale to deny marriage to gay couples? I understand why equality works, and I understand the constitutional ammendment position which I disagree with, but I don't understand the position that it's ok to deny gays marriage but wouldn't be ok to deny some other group marriage in favor of another relationship you're calling equality because you're hiding your bigotry.

TDG - that's actually a fair response, but it also outlines clearly why Obama is a threat to gays getting marriage equality.

Because any candidate who in favor of gay marriage will unfortunately lose the election? It's a shame but it's reality.

Same principle. If civil unions are equality what does it matter if one group of people have civil unions and another has marriage? What' the DIFFERENCE? that's what equality MEANS. If there is a difference then civil unions are not equality.

And... what does this have to do with your argument?

 

[Juice]

Well I'll say it again: damn I miss Tim Russert. He would have loved this political race! He didn't even get to see that it would be Obama as the nominee!

I miss him too, but he knew it was Obama. He's the one who will go down in history as calling the entire election!

 

[Gaborn]

In terms of the federal government, neither side should have access to marriage because of the religious associations behind the term.

I can't believe you're still having this same argument, regardless.

I didn't bring it up, I just stated my view once and was asked to explain it. I agree that the ideal would be everyone should have civil unions. When heterosexual couples start having their marriages legally redefined to civil unions I'll even support it.

Harson - it has everything to do with my argument. The fact that people see a difference between denying gay couples marriage and forcing minority couples to accept civil unions is why Obama is supporting a bigoted position.

 

[echoshifting]

Damn Cindy McCain is scary looking. Every time I see her picture I get chills.

I don't think the death of Tim Russert really hit me until I read this. Holy crap, how I would have loved to see that interview.

 

[Archer]

No, there's definitely a pattern here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024927/The-wife-John-McCain-callously-left-behind.html

She sounds like a good woman.

 

[laserbeam]

ST. PAUL — Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman — Democrat and friend of Republican presidential candidate John McCain — is expected to give a “speech like no other given at either a GOP or a Democratic convention,” sources say, in order to “make a positive, affirmative case for Sen. McCain.”

It is “a very personal speech that will appeal beyond party — a distinctive, transpartisan speech,” a source close to the campaign told FOX News.

Lieberman is expected to share some of his personal journey — and explain why, as a Democrat, he is even here. “It’s his,” the source said. “It’s from the heart.”

 

[speculawyer]

Guess which one was involved in a chemical spill.

Guess which one was not picked by John McCain.

 

[TDG]

TDG - that's actually a fair response, but it also outlines clearly why Obama is a threat to gays getting marriage equality.

I don't understand why you think that the movement for gay marriage ends with Obama being elected. Civil unions with the same rights as marriage, and let the states decide about marriage. That's a step in the right direction. You do realize that nearly every fight for equality has been won with baby steps, not with huge leaps, correct?

 

[Lemonz]

CNN: Barack Obama receives his first intelligence briefing.

 

[UltimaKilo]

So the RNC was having talks with Ron Paul, but they didn't get too far. Ron Paul just said "I can't see myself supporting McCain right now."

 

[Cloudy]

Damn Cindy McCain is scary looking. Every time I see her picture I get chills.

Heh, I think she's a total MILF

 

[greepoman]

That's NOT what Obama thinks though, is it? See, I believe the danger in Obama on the issue is in part the rhetoric he uses to convince people of his position. First, it's probably wise to assume people gravitate more towards moderate positions, if you define marriage equality at one end, and a constitutional ban on SSM at the other, the moderate position is probably Obama's. The PROBLEM is that when you couch rhetoric such as he is within a framework of "equal rights" RATHER THAN presenting it as a STEP towards equal rights you're saying that with civil unions you're not moving in the direction of equality, you're claiming that if you go with civil unions you have NO NEED to go forward. The entire purpose of marriage equality is to make the case that marriage equality is the ultimate goal. Obama is undercutting that with his belief that we only need to give gays the legal rights and can withhold the title just from gays.

Which makes me repeat my question. Do you believe if some random state decided to take away marriage rights from blacks and interracial couples in favor of giving them only civil unions that Obama would support or oppose it and what rationale would he use?

Wow...strange logic. So instead of doing the whole separate but equal with blacks in the South we should've just kept them as slaves?

Or maybe you could consider it a stepping stone on the path to true equality? Don't you see that once people see that civil unions don't end civlization as we know it and become accustomed to the idea it'll be a whole lot easier to pass equality laws about marriage only the general society?

You do realize that nearly every fight for equality has been won with baby steps, not with huge leaps, correct?

QFT

 

[WickedAngel]

Guess which one was not picked by John McCain.

I'm sure he would pick any of them (Provided that they're wearing right ensemble). A nurse's outfit would be both erotic and strangely appropriate, given his age.

 

[speculawyer]

Damn Cindy McCain is scary looking. Every time I see her picture I get chills.

She's a rich woman with an apparent obsession to continue looking like she's 20. Something is gonna give eventually.

 

[UltimaKilo]

ST. PAUL — Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman — Democrat and friend of Republican presidential candidate John McCain — is expected to give a “speech like no other given at either a GOP or a Democratic convention,” sources say, in order to “make a positive, affirmative case for Sen. McCain.”

It is “a very personal speech that will appeal beyond party — a distinctive, transpartisan speech,” a source close to the campaign told FOX News.

Lieberman is expected to share some of his personal journey — and explain why, as a Democrat, he is even here. “It’s his,” the source said. “It’s from the heart.”

Hey could you post again what Palin has done with the big oil companies for Jason's Ultimatum?

 

[RiZ III]

Cindy McCain must have been really hot when she was younger.

 

[gkryhewy]

Lieberman is expected to share some of his personal journey — and explain why, as a Democrat, he is even here. “It’s his,” the source said. “It’s from the heart.”

I'll look forward to hearing about the tragic theft of his mandible by Iraqi terrorists.

 

[Tamanon]

So the RNC was having talks with Ron Paul, but they didn't get too far. Ron Paul just said "I can't see myself supporting McCain right now."

Not a surprise there at all, McCain has lurched even further towards the evangelical base and away from the centrist foreign policy side.

 

[Freedom = $1.05]

No, there's definitely a pattern here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024927/The-wife-John-McCain-callously-left-behind.html

He knows when to cut and run! Oh wait...

 

[UltimaKilo]

I miss him too, but he knew it was Obama. He's the one who will go down in history as calling the entire election!

Yeah but remember his enthusiasm? He was always like a little kid a Christmas during MTP. Sleep warm Tim!

 

[tak]

WOW.

Here's why McCain cancelled.



Uncredulible.

So, the McCain camp is mad because they were not allowed to talk about their talking points? :lol

 

[Gaborn]

I don't understand why you think that the movement for gay marriage ends with Obama being elected. Civil unions with the same rights as marriage, and let the states decide about marriage. That's a step in the right direction. You do realize that nearly every fight for equality has been won with baby steps, not with huge leaps, correct?

A lot of the impetus for marriage equality comes from the fact gays don't have the rights and benefits of marriage. Straight couples can easily understand why that is a hardship for gay couples and inherently unfair. What straight couples don't understand as often is the aspect of dignity. I can easily see a person complaining that they have all the rights of straight couples "except I'm not really MARRIED, I'm UNIONED" and people not understanding what the problem is. Marriage equality is important because there's a respect and dignity to the title, to knowing that you've made a commitment to another person and entered into an institution as an expression of your love before the eyes of your entire community. Civil Unions were created as a means of singling out and ultimately, stigmatizing and setting apart gay couples as "different" and not worthy of that level of recognition and support from their community.

When civil unions are presented as a step along the path to true equality I don't find them objectionable. When you have candidate promoting them ONLY as a END, to establishing equality it makes it much harder to explain to straight couples what the word marriage means to gay couples. Why NOT give us 95% of the rights they have and forget it? That's GOOD ENOUGH, right?

Greepoman - No, of course you shouldn't have kept blacks as slaves. Ending slavery was a clear step along the road to equality. It ended the discussion for some people but it provided a clear PATH and rationale for other achievements down the line in the course to equality. With civil unions Obama thinks he can give gays MOST of the same rights as heterosexuals and that should be good enough for equality. THAT is dangerous logic.

 

[Farmboy]

Lieberman is expected to share some of his personal journey

Should be interesting. I've always wondered how one goes about becoming a complete turd. Joementum could provide some insight.

Has he officially left the Democratic Party yet? If not, maybe he'll use the speech to do so. Don't let the door hit you in the ass, Joe!

 

[TDG]

ST. PAUL — Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman — Democrat and friend of Republican presidential candidate John McCain — is expected to give a “speech like no other given at either a GOP or a Democratic convention,” sources say, in order to “make a positive, affirmative case for Sen. McCain.”

It is “a very personal speech that will appeal beyond party — a distinctive, transpartisan speech,” a source close to the campaign told FOX News.

Lieberman is expected to share some of his personal journey — and explain why, as a Democrat, he is even here. “It’s his,” the source said. “It’s from the heart.”

Lieberman is one of the biggest back-stabbing dickheads I have ever witnessed. I cannot describe my hatred for him. He is truly a disgusting human being.

That said, I just can't wait to hear the inspiring words from Lieberman, and the story of his life, and how his Joementum has evolved throughout his life.

 

[Tamanon]

Should be interesting. I've always wondered how one goes about becoming a complete turd. Joementum could provide some insight.

Has he officially left the Democratic Party yet? If not, maybe he'll use the speech to do so. Don't let the door hit you in the ass, Joe!

Yes he's officially an independent, just caucuses with the Dems.

 

[Instigator]

CNN reports Obama received his first sensitive intelligence briefing as the official Democratic nominee.

And now all that intelligence has been relayed to communists China, black nationalists and jihadists.

 

[echoshifting]

Heh, I think she's a total MILF

Would it be worth it if she ripped your head off and drank your blood afterwards? I mean...look at those eyes. That grin. There is an ancient evil hidden behind all that botox, thirsting for victims.

I'm probably not supposed to disparage her like this in this thread huh

 

[JayDubya]

Just to check Gaborn, does my "get rid of marriage and have it just be civil unions for everyone thing" pass muster for you? :lol

I'm just enjoying Gary Johnson on the CNN feed atm; when's the GOP main event kick back in?

 

[pxleyes]

Can someone fill me in on the details of why Obama opted out of the public financing he had previously supported?

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

sorry if old but holy shit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYYiw_y2qDI

Wow, that was hard to watch.

 

[Deus Ex Machina]

Palin's Small Alaska Town Secured Big Federal Funds

ST. PAUL, Minn., Sept. 1 -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin employed a lobbying firm to secure almost $27 million in federal earmarks for a town of 6,700 residents while she was its mayor, according to an analysis by an independent government watchdog group.

Read on... there's a lot more where that came from.

Think 27 million dollars when you see this pic.

 

[Particle Physicist]

Well you wouldn't want her to bee too successful, who knows how many houses she might then own! :lol

the issue isnt that mccain owns 7 houses. the issue is that he had no idea how many houses he owns.

 

[harSon]

Can someone fill me in on the details of why Obama opted out of the public financing he had previously supported?

Because no sane person would give up that big of an advantage.

 

[UltimaKilo]

Should be interesting. I've always wondered how one goes about becoming a complete turd. Joementum could provide some insight.

Has he officially left the Democratic Party yet? If not, maybe he'll use the speech to do so. Don't let the door hit you in the ass, Joe!

I hear this from Dems a lot, and then they go and support Obama. Truth is I believe a lot of dems would have supported John McCain if it wasn't for their fear of loosing elections. Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Russ Feingold, and even Joe Biden are some of the ones I thought would support McCain but Lieberman is the only one to step up. So I always posed the question: if John McCain is George Bush, and John Kerry wanted McCain to be his VP... wouldn't that make Kerry a bit hypocritical? :lol

 

[Mermandala]

saw this out on the intrawebz :

McCain : Memes First!

 

[grandjedi6]

I hear this from Dems a lot, and then they go and support Obama. Truth is I believe a lot of dems would have supported John McCain if it wasn't for their fear of loosing elections. Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Russ Feingold, and even Joe Biden are some of the ones I thought would support McCain but Lieberman is the only one to step up. So I always posed the question: if John McCain is George Bush, and John Kerry wanted McCain to be his VP... wouldn't that make Kerry a bit hypocritical? :lol

You see by claiming that Mccain 2000 and candidate Mccain are two different people all contridictions are eliminated.

 

[JCX]

http://www.ucbcomedy.com/videos/play/1506

 

[Dan]

Oh, I see Gaborn is back to spouting off about Obama being bad for gay rights. Astounding.

http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cach...tml&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=uk&client=firefox-a

12. In relationship to families, what are your top three priorities if elected governor?
SP: 1. Creating an atmosphere where parents feel welcome to choose the venues of education for their children.
2. Preserving the definition of “marriage” as defined in our constitution.
3. Cracking down on the things that harm family life: gangs, drug use, and infringement of our liberties including attacks on our 2nd Amendment rights.

That's a new one to me. I've never heard of guns being pro-family.

 

[Gaborn]

saw this out on the intrawebz :

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v70/mermandala/moozburger.jpg

McCain : Memes First!

I'm just curious, but what IS the problem with someone enjoying a mooseburger? It's not all that much different than people that enjoy venison or some other meat. I mean, it may be chic among some people to make fun of people for what they eat but it doesn't really speak well of the person doing it.