On MSNBC they just showed a woman being carried off by 2 airport security officials...

at LAX airport where she called herself a reporter and said she asked a secret service agent to give Obama a letter. When it was refused and she refused to give up, the airport security officials carried her away from where Obama was to land shortly. The letter was asking Obama to take a stand on "traditional marriage." She identified herself as a "Roman Catholic Priestess."

I guess she's just not schooled in irony, very well...

:rofl:

someone who lives in a different world than the rest of us.

She made a fool of herself.

The Woman is a dirty PUMA Bigot.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8438168

I have posted some details.

she must have escaped from Disney Land.

listens to people and has been known to evolve.

I'd love to read it because I have been under the impression that his belief is that Traditional Marriage is one man one woman. Glad to know I was mistaken...can't wait for you to give me the link as proof.

Someone "firmly on the side of traditional marriage" would NOT be for this:

"He supports full civil unions and federal rights for LGBT couples and opposes a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. He supports repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in a sensible way that strengthens our armed forces and our national security, and also believes that we must ensure adoption rights for all couples and individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/civil_rights/

it says he is for "Civil Unions". Apples and Oranges and they do not confer equivalent rights, and set up a separate but quasi-equal status. Not only didn't you prove your point, rather you completely validated mine. Obama is "firmly on the side of traditional MARRIAGE"....the exact SAME as the bigoted wacko they dragged away from Air Force One.

Someone like her would never accept the positions Obama supports.

ie (marriage=1 man + 1 woman) Obama has repeatedly confirmed this as his position in the matter as well, so how can you argue that on this issue (which is the subject of the OP in it's entirety) he is not firmly planted on her side? Reread your own post and you will see...on the issue of "Please support Traditional Marriage", he IS on her side and so far immovable on the issue...hence "firmly planted".

Nice try. If he WAS taking a stand on traditional marriage, why would she feel the need to give him a letter telling him to take a stand on it?

with The Associated Press that she wanted to hand Obama a letter urging him "to take a stand for traditional marriage."

He has repeatedly done just that but unequivocally stating "I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."

Those are Obama's words, not mine. Obvious that in saying this publicly and on record that he has "taken a stand in support of Traditional Marriage" which is exactly what this reporter wants. Therefore, in the issue of "gay marriage" this reporter and Obama share the same view. He has not wavered from this stance, hence it can be said he is "firmly planted on her side".

Obama hasn't "taken a stand" by saying that. He ALSO said, repeatedly, and unequivocally, that he's a "fierce advocate for equal rights for gay and lesbian Americans."

I would say that publicly making a statement ON RECORD on an issue would be akin to "taking a stand" on that issue. You however disagree with that, so we are at an impasse. So be it. Have a good week and a great weekend! Peace.:hi:

your argument fails since he has ALSO publicly made statements ON RECORD saying he's a fierce advocate for gay and lesbian Americans. Have a good week and a great weekend. ;) :hi:

would fully support equal rights for our LGBT citizens, including "marriage equality". Again, different perspectives, different life experiences, different conclusions. Thanks for the exchange though.

but he is NOT firmly in the same camp as the lady in my original post. He's far more progressive than her. No problem. :)

"traditional marriage" (which I haven't him talk about much at all).

and, while he largely has tried to avoid the discussion of LGBT since the election, in those instances where he has been cornered and questioned, he repeatedly adheres to the statement that "marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman...period. I am quite perplexed by this since he is touted as a "Constitutional Scholar", but all in all, I'm quite sure it is more related to "Politics" than "Personal Belief", and the LGBT community has always been expendable to politicians beyond the primary season. To be honest, Obama was not my candidate of choice in the primaries for his very stance on Gay Marriage, health care (I support HR 676), and his being a Corporatist instead of a Populist. However, as is always the case, my preferred candidate dropped from the race before my state held their primaries, so Obama emerged as just another lesser of evils vote for me personally.

he says. And I will bet you right now that he said he's for gay rights (as he sees them) more often than he's said "marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman." Funny-I would never have guessed Obama wasn't your first choice after your comments, especially the "lesser of evils vote" thing. I'm sorry you don't really support him, but I do as do most on this site as they're supposed to. I have no doubt he WILL follow through on his campaign promises even though those won't be enough for you. I care about gay rights if only because I'm a liberal and I have friends who are gay who are very close to me and whose lives I'm very involved in. It may not personally affect me as much as you or my friends, but that doesn't mean I don't care.

OK, admittedly I did insert the word "equal" in your statement, but I did so on purpose.

as straight couples without the word "marriage" means he's FOR gay "equal" rights. Like I said, I agree with YOU, but he didn't run on gay MARRIAGE.

given his public statements on the issue of gay marriage. Supporting "something else" to set up some separate but equal arrangement doesn't cut it in my world. I am gay, and because he doesn't hold my views whereas another candidate in the primaries DID, I said I supported that other candidate and defaulted to Obama only after my candidate (who was also a DEM, albeit a "Progressive Dem") you berated me for it. If Obama is everything you could have possibly ever hoped for then I am very happy for you because that is great. But I walk in different shoes, and there are areas where my life path and Obama's political path are totally divergent. Unfortunately, those areas happen to be over issues that are extremely important to me. I do NOT dislike Obama, I do not hope he fails (except in his effort to exclude single payer from the health care mix, and should he cement some "separate but equal" policy for the LGBT community, and maybe compromising with Conservatives on changes to Social Security), he simply was not my preferred choice in the primaries. I did support him at the ballot box in November, but that doesn't mean I have to totally conform to every single aspect of his politics does it? So yes, he was a lesser of two evils vote for me in the end...but that is just a "saying" and no I do not think he is "evil"...misguided on some issues perhaps, but certainly not "evil". He is likely the greatest President in my lifetime, but even at that there are issues, for me personally, where he doesn't quite make the cut. I knew that when I voted for him in November, but I did not think that through my vote I was simultaneously relinquishing my right to ever criticize that portion of his policies that I disagree with.

Like I have said at least a couple times already, I do NOT agree with him on this subject-I wish he would give gay people the right to get married (with the word "marriage,") but you don't seem to pay attention to those words of mine. Otherwise you wouldn't think Obama is "everything I could have possibly ever hoped for." I also wish he would've already repealed DADT and DOMA. I've given my opinion on his not yet repealing DADT more than once.

You say I berated you for supporting someone else in the primaries? Who did you support and how did I berate you? It's easy for you to accuse someone of something with no specifics or proof. I'd love to see some.

You put a big strawman out there. Who said you have to "totally conform to every single aspect of his politics"? And who said you relinquished your right to ever criticize portions of his policies that you disagree with? I never said any of that. Please stop putting words in my mouth and then arguing against them.

She's a reporter for her local Church of the Sacred Expanding Uterus.

Seriously, though, I've seen a metallic sculpture outside a K of C Hall with two or three uteruses with fetuses growing in them. I need to stop and get a picture next time I drive by it in the daylight.

going to get anyone what they want.