Yes, we can.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

If it matters, I think the government should be out of the marriage business all together.

Could you please define "out of the marriage business"?

Does that include the IRS?
How would you deal with a contentious divorce?
Child custody?


As a total aside, I just saw the comment Leno made on the subject of gay marriage. "They should have the same right to be miserable as the rest of us".

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by JWBear

iSm... Hillary Clinton has the exact same position on gay marriage as Obama.

Then I likely would not have voted for her either.

In California, we have the blessing of our election not matter to the presidential candidates. So we are not bombarded with ads (which I wouldn't see anyway, since I don't watch TV) and they generally don't bother to campaign here.

As such, I have limited opportunities to hear them speak. If I'd seen Hillary speak about her stance on gay marriage rights, she would have lost my support then and there. I think I assumed as much about both candidates, but hearing it from their lips puts a chill in me that I cannot shake.


If Obama tries not to have his religious beliefs dominate or determine his stance on this matter, he needs to try harder. Because right now, he fails.

[Morrigoon]

Instead of leaving it blank, how about a write-in vote?

[Gemini Cricket]

Something is not right. We have a terrific candidate and a terrific VP candidate. We're coming off the worst eight years in our country's history. Six of those eight years the Congress, White House and even the Supreme Court were controlled by the Republicans and the last two years the R's have filibustered like tantrum throwing 4-year-olds, yet we're going to elect a Republican who voted with that leadership 90% of the time and a former sportscaster who wants to teach Adam and Eve as science? That's not odd as a difference of opinion, that's logically and mathematically queer.

Source

JWBear posted the above link in the Random Politics thread.

I'm not good at writing out what's in my brain. But what he writes is exactly what I am talking about.

1. Obama has no game plan right now. We're going to lose. He has much to his advantage, but he's reading from the Gore/Kerry Playbook and thinking he'll succeed where they didn't just because.

2. The press is not liberal. They are run by big corporations who benefited financially from the last 8 years and want to see 8 more. Forget that particle accelerator, CEOs like Rupert Murdoch are f*cking this country and this planet up just to make money.

3. There is no convincing the Christian conservative right of anything. They stick to their party like they do to their religion of choice. Ever try talking to someone about religion and try to sway them? It's impossible. That is now becoming true of a majority of people who vote Republican just because GOP candidates outwardly talk about Christianity and Christian beliefs. The Democrats are in the minority because a lot of them think with their brains and not their bibles and sway. Take iSm for example: liberal, Obama supporting but because he wants to be true to his conscience, he is protest voting. Republicans, conservatives do not do that, they don't stray from their way of thinking no matter what. It's much more black and white for them. And why? Because it's easier to look at things in black and white without having to think about what comes between. The ironic thing is that these politicians are looking to retain their jobs and don't give a sh!t about Christianity, family values. The corruption, the affairs, and the cover-ups that follow demonstrate that.


So what does Obama need to do? He needs to paint McCain as someone who is not a Maverick but someone who follows the Bush playbook. Bush is out of the spotlight for a reason. Because someone told him to vanish. The less we think about Bush, the less we think about comparing McCain to Bush.

I agree with Adam McKay that Obama needs to come up with a slogan that sums up what he feels about McCain and Palin. And repeat it, over and over and over. Something catchy and repeated like that can sway voters. It worked for Bush. Heck, it even worked for Johnny Cochran.

Obama needs to come out swinging and make the country forget that he was eaten alive by Palin. If he's got to dig in the dirt to do it, so be it. The opposing party already has mud under their fingernails. I want to be represented by someone with guts. Obama is not that person right now. I'll vote for him, but the idea of protest voting intrigues me too.

[Capt Jack]

found this. thought some might enjoy it.



that is all

[Tenigma]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Sorry, CP, but your link did nothing but cement my opposition to Obama.

I hope he wins rather than McCain, but I cannot support his election.

You should know that elections often boil down to choosing the person who is either less offensive or a little more likeable than the other.

I'm really very disappointed in your decision, iSm. Voting is the ONE right you have in this country. And you choose to waste it.

[innerSpaceman]

I'm hardly wasting it, Tenigma. I'm casting the most important vote of my life. The vote to RETAIN my rights to marry the person I love.


There's never been a presidential election in California nearly as important. The presidential election has NEVER been a contest in this state for the 30 years I've lived here.


Don't presume to tell me my vote is wasted. Where did I EVER say I'm not casting a vote for president? I said I'm not voting for either the Republican or Democratic candidate. Sheesh.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Could you please define "out of the marriage business"?

Does that include the IRS?
How would you deal with a contentious divorce?
Child custody?


As a total aside, I just saw the comment Leno made on the subject of gay marriage. "They should have the same right to be miserable as the rest of us".

Yes on the IRS.
Contentious divorce and child bustody....good questions. Admittedly no idea.

[scaeagles]

For the record...from an AP article....

Palin said during her 2006 gubernatorial campaign that if she were elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add creation-based alternatives to the state's required curriculum, or look for creationism advocates when she appointed board members.

At a GOP presidential debate in May 2007 in Simi Valley, Calif., McCain said he believed in evolution.

"But," he added, "I also believe, when I hike the Grand Canyon and see it at sunset, that the hand of God is there also."

Palin's children attend public schools and Palin has made no push to have creationism taught in them.

[Alex]

No on the IRS. I don't see any reason why two married people living in different houses should get different tax consideration than two unmarried people living together.

No on the contentious divorce. If the government isn't defining marriage then there is nothing for government to dissolve. Either the people in the "divorce" will never have legally solidified their relationship in which case they are free to walk away however they want or they have legally solidified it in other ways and they can pursue remedies through the civil courts.

Irrelevant on child custody and support. Those laws already mostly exist independent of marriage anyway and to the extent they don't, they should regardless of what happens with marriage. It isn't like I get out of supporting my child or lose any legal right to participation simply because I was never married to the mother.