GAY Obama officially endorses same-sex marriage.

eileenbunny said:
Did you ask him? Who's polls? I've seen polls that are all over the place on this issue. There's a reason why gay rights are shot down almost every time it goes to referendum. The tides are turning, but it's slow and last time I checked Colorado still leaned to the conservative side. And what about those other 4 guys? Are they not at all to blame for this just because they voted first?
Click to expand...

http://www.one-colorado.org/news/republicans-block-civil-unions-bill-supported-by-72-of-coloradans/

A February 2011 poll by Public Policy Polling found that 72% of Colorado voters support legal recognition of gay and lesbian couples.

Additionally, a Greenberg Quinlan Rosner poll conducted in 2010 found support for civil unions across political parties and religious affiliations, including 61% of Republicans, 84% of independents, 70% of Catholics, 67% of Protestants, and 55% of “born again Christians.”
Click to expand...

The others are also just GOP towing the leadership's line. This last one, however, ignored his direct family impact, ignored his constituents, ignored equal rights, ignored national public polling, and just went with what Reince Prebus told him to follow.

And we call these people "representatives"? Who are they representing? Certainly not the people that voted them in and pay their salaries and health care.
 
Floptical said:
The last time this was opened to the Colorado public to vote on was 2006. Then the general public voted to ban it. Since there hasn't been a public vote since then they based their votes off what the public said last time.

Here is a quote from Rep. Coram who was the "deciding vote"

"What you're asking me to do here is invalidate the vote of six years ago," Coram said. "I'm concerned that the gay community is being used as a political pawn. For four years we had a Democrat governor, a Democrat house and a Democrat Senate. The issue never came up. It only came up when we got a split house."
Click to expand...

Oh, it is definitely the Dem's fault for not at least putting a bill up for vote in such conditions. That's the lame efforts of the equal rights groups of Colorado that let that happen.
 
Floptical said:
The housing market here hardly took a readable hit. The values here were never over inflated as well as the there was no huge job losses due to there being such a variety of work here. Actually a crap ton of companies have moved their operations to Denver from the coasts due to this.
Click to expand...

It seems they were number 10 in the country for high rate of foreclosures circa September 2008. Anyway, this isn't really proving anything, just like that asinine comment that wanker made.

http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2008/10/20/daily36.html
 
dbzeag said:
Oh, it is definitely the Dem's fault for not at least putting a bill up for vote in such conditions. That's the lame efforts of the equal rights groups of Colorado that let that happen.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying it's the Dem's fault at all but you can't blame someone for voting in line with what the public voted for. As far as getting a bill on the general election it's someone's fault for not doing it. They don't seem to have any issues getting bills for weed legalization on every single general election.
 
dbzeag said:
Oh, it is definitely the Dem's fault for not at least putting a bill up for vote in such conditions. That's the lame efforts of the equal rights groups of Colorado that let that happen.
Click to expand...

What about the homosexual activists? Where were they when the Dems had total control? I don't remember seeing them until Repubs got some control back.
 
Representatives are supposed to REPRESENT their constituents. If all of your constituents are afraid of penii touching, then you should vote that way too.
 
Pork Soda said:
What about the homosexual activists? Where were they when the Dems had total control? I don't remember seeing them until Repubs got some control back.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I'm trying to say. The activists may have always been there but really not doing much. It only takes a certain number of signatures to get a bill onto a election. They get repeating bills every single general election no matter if it's for POTIS, Governor, or your local water board. Either they haven't been active or they don't get enough signatures from the general public.
 
Sarcasmo said:
Representatives are supposed to REPRESENT their constituents. If all of your constituents are afraid of penii touching, then you should vote that way too.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If the tables were reversed and say the entire public voted to for free WIFI throughout the entire state and then for whatever reason it came back up for vote again and they voted it down even though the public wanted it everyone would be out for blood against them.
 
Sarcasmo said:
Representatives are supposed to REPRESENT their constituents. If all of your constituents are afraid of penii touching, then you should vote that way too.
Click to expand...

Relying on the sentiments of constituents 6 years ago is utter laziness and is also leaving yourself vulnerable to being wrong.
 
Floptical said:
I'm not saying it's the Dem's fault at all but you can't blame someone for voting in line with what the public voted for. As far as getting a bill on the general election it's someone's fault for not doing it. They don't seem to have any issues getting bills for weed legalization on every single general election.
Click to expand...

Oh that's the HRC's fault. The gay group's fault. After 32 losses, they are hesitant about putting anything for popular vote.

And it's also the principle of the thing: This is a fundimental right (according to the Supreme Court), therefore should not be up to a popular vote. Rights are not up for vote.
 
Pork Soda said:
What about the homosexual activists? Where were they when the Dems had total control? I don't remember seeing them until Repubs got some control back.
Click to expand...

Yes, exactly. Maybe not the Dems exclusively, but the gay rights groups really dropped the ball.
 
Pork Soda said:
Relying on the sentiments of constituents 6 years ago is utter laziness and is also leaving yourself vulnerable to being wrong.
Click to expand...

6 years ago, the majority did NOT want marriage equality. Quite actually they don't want marriage equality NOW. They just want a "civil union" which is separate but equal in the eyes of the public. A majority want that.
 
Floptical said:
That's exactly what I'm trying to say. The activists may have always been there but really not doing much. It only takes a certain number of signatures to get a bill onto a election. They get repeating bills every single general election no matter if it's for POTIS, Governor, or your local water board. Either they haven't been active or they don't get enough signatures from the general public.
Click to expand...

They need to be proactive rather than reactive.

It seems when the Dems have control, life is ok because no one is talking about them negatively. Yet when the Repubs gain control, the hardcore consertives come out of the wood work to put forth what they want, and banning gay marriage is one of them. Gays need to beat the conservatives at their own game.
 
dbzeag said:
Oh that's the HRC's fault. The gay group's fault. After 32 losses, they are hesitant about putting anything for popular vote.

And it's also the principle of the thing: This is a fundimental right (according to the Supreme Court), therefore should not be up to a popular vote. Rights are not up for vote.
Click to expand...

Show me something that says any type of marriage is a fundamental right? Also saying someone is hesitant about putting anything for vote is complete BS. If it's something you want you never stop until you get it. Do you think there would be states will open carry laws, concealed weapons, capital punishment, no capital punishment, oil drilling, no oil drilling, medial marijuana, etc without someone pushing to at least get it up for a vote.
 
The thing is, I doubt anyone walked into his office with reliable current figures and signatures from his constituents. If they had he may have voted differently. He can't vote differently because his son happens to like the sausages. That shouldn't come into play at all, in fact, we shouldn't even need to know that about him. It is irrelevant. And his personal feelings on the subject are irrelevant too. He also doesn't have time to research every issue that comes across his desk, so he relies on his constituents to tell him what they want. If they don't he has to go with what he knows, which in this case appears to be 6 year old data. This isn't an issue that it even seems like he cares about, so someone would need to make him care about it. I doubt anyone took the time. Where were the activists and lobbyists?
 
dbzeag said:
6 years ago, the majority did NOT want marriage equality. Quite actually they don't want marriage equality NOW. They just want a "civil union" which is separate but equal in the eyes of the public. A majority want that.
Click to expand...

Why don't they or haven't they gone out and get the 86000 signatures and get the thing on a general vote? There is at least 1 per year for something. I myself think it's stupid that it's even something to vote on let alone them wasting time on. I do however find it very suspect that it's all of a sudden become an issue at the POTIS level. If he felt that way before why wait until now?
 
eileenbunny said:
The thing is, I doubt anyone walked into his office with reliable current figures and signatures from his constituents. If they had he may have voted differently. He can't vote differently because his son happens to like the sausages. That shouldn't come into play at all, in fact, we shouldn't even need to know that about him. It is irrelevant. And his personal feelings on the subject are irrelevant too. He also doesn't have time to research every issue that comes across his desk, so he relies on his constituents to tell him what they want. If they don't he has to go with what he knows, which in this case appears to be 6 year old data. This isn't an issue that it even seems like he cares about, so someone would need to make him care about it. I doubt anyone took the time. Where were the activists and lobbyists?
Click to expand...

Especially true since the votes was the at State Veterans & Military Affairs Committee
 
Floptical said:
Show me something that says any type of marriage is a fundamental right? Also saying someone is hesitant about putting anything for vote is complete BS. If it's something you want you never stop until you get it. Do you think there would be states will open carry laws, concealed weapons, capital punishment, no capital punishment, oil drilling, no oil drilling, medial marijuana, etc without someone pushing to at least get it up for a vote.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia#Decision

They would be hestitent about pushing a bill if the timing wasn't right. Not about pushing the bill in general. I know a lot of the legislation about these civil union bills and such have been on backburners because the reps were waiting to get approvals in their favor before they went ahead and submitted the bill for vote. This has happened lots of times. Barney Frank did not push the marriage bill for Mass until he got enough votes, or at least though he did. It wasn't that he didn't want the bill, he just timed it's submission to maximize passage chances.

For better or worse.
 
eileenbunny said:
The thing is, I doubt anyone walked into his office with reliable current figures and signatures from his constituents. If they had he may have voted differently. He can't vote differently because his son happens to like the sausages. That shouldn't come into play at all, in fact, we shouldn't even need to know that about him. It is irrelevant. And his personal feelings on the subject are irrelevant too. He also doesn't have time to research every issue that comes across his desk, so he relies on his constituents to tell him what they want. If they don't he has to go with what he knows, which in this case appears to be 6 year old data. This isn't an issue that it even seems like he cares about, so someone would need to make him care about it. I doubt anyone took the time. Where were the activists and lobbyists?
Click to expand...

This is where the RNC chair DID. He made gay marriage a wedge issue and instructed those from the RNC party of this platform and to vote inline with this platform.

The equal rights group, however, did not do the same. That was their fault.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back