How do you fell about the Defense of Marriage Act?

Who signed the Defense of Marriage Act?

Who failed to influence the president to veto the Defense of Marriage Act? (yet influenced so many other White House policies in the 90s)

Who has followers that are blasting Obama this morning for associating with a religious bigot?

Who is perfect? (And no it is not the Edwards guy--he's opposed to gay marriage and thus equal rights as well)

Funny how John Kerry was maligned at one point for not being "pro-gay" enough but he was one of a few Senators to have the courage to vote against it.

Similarly Obama is being attacked for a superficial issue when in fact history suggests he will do a better job for GLBT's than the Clintons will.

Including Senators Biden, Dodd, Leahy, Reid, Murray, Daschle, and Levin.

Dick Gephardt, John Murtha, Steny Hoyer, and Chuck Schumer also voted for DOMA in the House.

Hillary Clinton did not sign the bill, nor did she vote for it.

Of course she didn't sign it. That's what the President does...or in this case, Bill.

"Nor did she vote for it", but that was because she wasn't in the Senate at the time.


"She also said she would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, a bill passed by Congress in 1996 that prevents 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 has always been, between a man and a woman," Clinton said."

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1589/is_2000_Feb_15/ai_59410444


That's what googling does.

Hillary Clinton did not. Do you dispute that?

for something she had no official hand in, when people who actually voted FOR the bill are given a free pass.

The eleven Senators and Represenatitives that I listed in MY previous post deserve far more blame for DOMAs existence than Hillary Clinton does. For that matter, all of the Democratic Senators and Representatives who voted for the bill are more responsible than Hillary Clinton.

But I'd hate to confuse the Obamanation with facts.

For one, you don't need to be a supporter of any candidate to post what I did.

You assert she didn't vote for it. I pointed out that she wasn't in the Senate at the time. Were I disingenious, I would point out that she didn't vote AGAINST it.

I also posted an article with a Hillary quote in support of DOMA.

Sorry.

is somehow responsible for a bill that she did not sponsor, vote for, or sign. I didn't sponsor, vote for, or sign the DOMA bill either. So am I responsible for it?

I am no Hillary supporter, but I can't sit back and let people make things up in their passionate drive to demonize Senator Clinton for everything from DOMA to DADT to the Patriot Act to the Iraq War to inflation, homelessness, HIV, and all of the other problems we face.

And while you're at it, point out anything I posted that is not true or is misleading.

Talk about passion...

stating that she would have voted for DOMA. That is not the same as actually having voted for DOMA. Obfuscation and deflection is a speciality of the anti-Hillary brigade.

I pointed out that there are other Democrats who are much higher on the list than Hillary Clinton when it comes to assigning blame for DOMA: people who actually voted FOR the bill and signed it. The meaning of that statement seems to be lost to some people.

This would be part of that. Either she gets blame where it is due with the credit where its due or its neither.

no matter how much she desires either. Laura Bush is not more responsible than her husband for Iraq and the 9/11 intelligence failings, and Senator Clinton is not more responsible for DOMA than a number of Democratic Senators and Representatives.

there are many names on the pro-DOMA list who deserve blame for that vile bill.

he talks all about it in his autobiography "The Conscience of a Liberal"

Have a look for yourself:
http://books.google.com/books?id=Pd8W7x61p8kC&dq=conscience+of+a+liberal+wellstone&pg=PP1&ots=PGpSPJ6U2G&sig=vC_oBWnx41fL33KrL-b4s6DnRSU&hl=en&prev=http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&suggon=0&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=Lsg&q=conscience+of+a+liberal+wellstone&btnG=Search&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail

But thankfully nobody got killed unnecessarily for DOMA.

A policy which is wrong and which WILL be ultimately repealed..

And a movement that proclaims people who are gay, who are lesbian, who are bisexual and transgendered to be "sick" and "cursed" and who need to be "cured"...a movement that causes and abets teenage GLBT suicide...a movement that it emotionally damaging and abusive...

If you don't understand the distinctions between the two...you're an idiot. You're a sadly, misinformed ignorant person who doesn't really give a flying fuck about this issue at all.

Because people believe gays and lesbians are sick heathens who are going to hell and have no business entering the sacred bonds of marriages.

Putting discrimination into law and ito state constitutions codifies the belief of the people who think GLBT are sick.

I applaud your efforts to try to explain why that response is nonsensical.

:hug:

but it was an election-year issue that the Republicans tried to trap Clinton in, and it staved off a constitutional amendment.

I believe there's no way Clinton would've initiated such a thing.

Very "unfortunate".

you're saying the IWR and the Patriot Act were election-year issues used to hurt the President?

That doesn't make any sense.

I'm also sorry if that was too difficult for anyone to understand.

with ANY republican and all of the sudden he is evil incarnate. Both things have to do with political expediency, though Obama's move might actually benefit LGBTs.

I feel worse that Iowa's Governor is 'falling in line' with the discriminatory jackasses.

not so much to point out a mistake x(

I failed miserably!

:hi:

one. Culver. Jeesh. Not that Blouin would have been better. Now that Fallon cat...he wouldn't be doing this.

BIll Clinton did not veto DOMA and let the Congress over ride his veto.

he didn't fall into their trap, and he staved off a constitutional amendment.

Stop with this nonsensical rationalizing an act of cowardice and betrayal at the highest level possible.

A constitutional amendment takes years to achieve and is nearly impossible. Clinton should have vetoed the bill and then let both houses of congress over ride that veto which would have been the next step and which was not even a certainty. I was involved in that fight.j

No, he put it into federal law.

Not even a "signing statement" either.

Some friend.

he signed a popular law just before his reelection.

He could've vetoed it, had it overridden, and lost the election. So DOMA would still be law, and Dole could've won.

John Kennedy, who needed every single Southern state to be re-elected in 1964, sent the National Guard to Old Miss University to enforce intergration.

That a profile in courage.

That said, at least you were honest about "why" Bill Clinton signed it into law, MonkeyFunk, and that took courage, too.

Others here have made outlandish excuses about why Bill did it.

You are, admirably honest.

why would I be? But I understand the political realities.

Sacrificing his presidency for something that ultimately would become law anyway probably wasn't a rational thing to do.

This stupid bill was created by Republicans and pushed by Republicans. I blame them first and foremost for its existence.

:thumbsup:

Hillary has stated she would not get rid of it.

Since Hillary's campaign web site has several homophobes endorsing her as well as a few homophobes on her payroll, why should this be a surprise to anyone. Once a Goldwater Girl, always a Goldwater Girl.

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH

Equal Marriage: Vocal proponent of same-sex marriage. Has said that there is no reason why it should be restricted to a man and a woman.

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell: Supports the repeal of DADT.

Hate Crimes: Co-sponsor of the bill that would add gender identity and sexual orientation to the definition of hate crimes. Pushed for its passage.

ENDA: Sponsor of ENDA.

HIV/AIDS: Kucinich has called for a massive increase in federal spending on HIV/AIDS research and prevention.

Transgender Issues: Supports a federal bill that would prohibit discrimination based on gender identity; supports adding gender identity to the definition of hate crimes.

Comment:

Kucinich is widely considered the most progressive candidate on GLBT issues. He regularly includes transgenders when he talks about gay issues, and has called for equal marriage for all. He is one of the few Democratic candidates to have voted against the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman. He also believes gays and lesbians should be treated equally by employers.

A couple months ago, when asked whether he was pro-gay marriage, he said, “ The answer to your question is yes. And let me tell you why. Because if our Constitution really means what it says, that all are created equal, if it really means what it says, that there should be equality of opportunity before the law, then our brothers and sisters who happen to be gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender should have the same rights accorded to them as anyone else, and that includes the ability to have a civil marriage ceremony.”

Kucinich was a sponsor of the Permanent Partners Act, which would treat same-sex partners as equivalent to heterosexual partners for purposes of immigration.

I'm continually shocked that he doesn't get more support than he does. Oh, wait, that's right. He claims to have seen a UFO. Never mind, the aforementioned gay rights message, impeachment, ditching the Patriot Act, making this administration accountable, ending the war... You know, ALL the shit we bitch about here on DU day in and day out.

There is really no ambiguity in DK's positions. That, and the fact that his positions are RIGHT, are some of the stronger reasons why I continue to support him.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Another product of the Clinton admin.

and is inviting this type of scrutiny.

Doma is in the past, and you can't unring a bell. But, we can do something about today and the future, and the fact is, today Obama's campaign is accepting endorsements from and hiring folks from the exgay movement. This is far beyond homophobia, as the exgay movement seeks to destroy GLBT identity.

It is a shame that good people have to pass bad legislation to head off potentially worse legislation. And it is a shame good people are forced by the electorate they serve to vote in favor of bad legislation.

DOMA did not outlaw same-sex marriage. It made the decision a state one.

1. No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) need recognize a marriage between persons of the same sex, even if the marriage was concluded or recognized in another state.
2. The Federal Government may not recognize same-sex or polygamous marriages for any purpose, even if concluded or recognized by one of the states.

Keep in mind - there has been a move to make a constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage. Difficult to do, but also difficult to undo. And at the time of DOMA, there was every reason to believe the GOP's dominance would continue to expand to the point such an amendment was a realistic goal.

DOMA - not good. But if they prospect of a constitutional amendment rears it's head again, Democrats will point to DOMA and say 'no such amendment is needed.'

Add to that the odious Don't Ask-Don't Tell.

Thank you Bill, for all the wonderful BOHICAs you have given the LGBT community.

An easily repealed law vs. a constitutional amendment.

If Clinton hadn't signed the Defense of Marriage Act, a strong push (maybe even successful) would have been launched during Bush's presidency. I think Clinton was smart to stop that effort until America had time to get their heads around the idea of gay marriages (which they are starting to do).

and I don't excuse those who signed it or failed to at least attempt to oppose it.

I don't give a flying fuck WHO they are.

For the record, my candidate did not vote for it, and my candidate has a strong, clear, stance in support of gay marriage.