Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mother Jones)   Timeline for which politicians have supported gay marriage and when they started to support it   (motherjones.com) divider line 159
    More: Interesting, Reince Priebus, Defense of Marriage Act, politicos  
•       •       •

3815 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Mar 2013 at 10:16 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



159 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-26 09:38:47 AM  
Where's Barney Frank?
 
2013-03-26 10:03:41 AM  
0bama in 1996??
Fail.

He didn't support it until last year.

In his 2008 campaign he was against it.
 
2013-03-26 10:09:00 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: 0bama in 1996??
Fail.

He didn't support it until last year.

In his 2008 campaign he was against it.


He was for it before he was against and for it again.  It is in the article if you would have read it.
 
2013-03-26 10:09:12 AM  
Dick Cheney approved of men shooting each other in the face long before 2004.
 
2013-03-26 10:10:04 AM  
Huh, interesting.
 
2013-03-26 10:13:34 AM  

BunkoSquad: Where's Barney Frank?


I don't think he supported gay marriage.  He didn't want the cow.  He just wanted the free milk.  Until his lover forced him into it recently, that man was a goddamned bachelor hero.  Getting some at home.  And keeping his options open.  He was the gay version of Sam Malone...without a bar...or pro-baseball career...or great hair.
 
2013-03-26 10:18:03 AM  

mrshowrules: tenpoundsofcheese: 0bama in 1996??
Fail.

He didn't support it until last year.

In his 2008 campaign he was against it.

He was for it before he was against and for it again.  It is in the article if you would have read it.


Did he ever explain that? I know about the "evolving" line but I don't think we ever got anything beyond Gibbs/Carney equivocation.
 
2013-03-26 10:18:45 AM  
Hagel, a former Republican Senator, is pressed on whether he'd allow gay soldiers to get married on military bases: "What we don't want...is that we don't want someone to be denied to be married in a chapel or a facility and so on."

Can someone comment on if "military base" religious facilities fall under a different "realm" than just religious facilities in general?

Because, my whole argument about that Homosexual marriage should be legal is that we are only talking about "Legal" marriages, ie. getting a state-sponsored marriage licence.... NOT forcing or mandating any specific churches to perform same-sex marriages in their buildings or by their clergy.  Although, hey, I'd love all the religious institutions to get into the 21st century, that is going to be a major non-starter if that is part of the "law".  But, the main argument is that, a "Legal" marriage is not the same thing as a Religious marriage/wedding "ritual", and that allowing same-sex marriages "legally" does not force churches to perform them.

He seems to be going to that level.. but, again, is that because those chapels a "government" building, vs. non-military churches/chapels?
 
2013-03-26 10:20:23 AM  
Basically, the only national political leader to show support for gay marriage before approval went over 50% of Dick Cheney.
 
2013-03-26 10:21:36 AM  
this will be interesting ...
will TRUE CONSERVATIVES (tm) still run on an anti-gay-marriage platform??

Will the GOP remove that position from its website and platform?
We know that they will still secretly hate the gays and marriage ...
 
2013-03-26 10:22:48 AM  

mrshowrules: tenpoundsofcheese: 0bama in 1996??
Fail.

He didn't support it until last year.

In his 2008 campaign he was against it.

He was for it before he was against and for it again.  It is in the article if you would have read it.


He was for Romney before he was against Romney.

/or something
 
2013-03-26 10:23:07 AM  

WTF Indeed: Basically, the only national political leader to show support for gay marriage before approval went over 50% of Dick Cheney.


FARK CHENEY
may he burn in hell for all eternity
bet he is against way profiteering and the war in iraq too

FARK HIM IN THE HEAD WITH A ...
ooooh nevermind
 
2013-03-26 10:23:28 AM  
During their campaign before an election?

What did I win?

Holy cow. I did not know the democrats were such a pandering bunch. Haha, kidding, I always knew they were a pandering bunch.
 
2013-03-26 10:23:49 AM  

namatad: this will be interesting ...
will TRUE CONSERVATIVES (tm) still run on an anti-gay-marriage platform??

Will the GOP remove that position from its website and platform?
We know that they will still secretly hate the gays and marriage ...


Doesn't really matter what they 'secretly feel', as long as they are voting for what they publicly say they believe.
 
2013-03-26 10:24:02 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: 0bama in 1996??
Fail.

He didn't support it until last year.

In his 2008 campaign he was against it.


Came for this. Obama voter and gay man, annoyed me he used his "evolving" position as a means to a political end in a time of uncertainty. But I recognize this is how politics works, its just incredibly phony.
 
2013-03-26 10:24:28 AM  

WTF Indeed: Basically, the only national political leader to show support for gay marriage before approval went over 50% of Dick Cheney.


The first Republican, anyway.  Say what you want about Darth Cheney, I think this is pretty cool.

/dude may be evil, but I'm thinking his gay-rights stance is based in pragmatism
//I remember something on Fark once where even Dubya wasn't all too keen on (for example) DADT because they were losing valuable gay military linguists to it.
 
2013-03-26 10:25:55 AM  
Oh, and Cheney said what he said BEFORE the 2004 election.

Ballsy, man.  Ballsy.
 
2013-03-26 10:26:29 AM  

xanadian: WTF Indeed: Basically, the only national political leader to show support for gay marriage before approval went over 50% of Dick Cheney.

The first Republican, anyway.  Say what you want about Darth Cheney, I think this is pretty cool.

/dude may be evil, but I'm thinking his gay-rights stance is based in pragmatism
//I remember something on Fark once where even Dubya wasn't all too keen on (for example) DADT because they were losing valuable gay military linguists to it.


And you certainly do not want to lose cunning linguists.
 
2013-03-26 10:27:20 AM  

Giltric: During their campaign before an election?

What did I win?

Holy cow. I did not know the democrats were such a pandering bunch. Haha, kidding, I always knew they were a pandering bunch.


True. The Republicans are firm in their bigotry. You can always count on them to support discrimination without concern for the views of the people. They will remain on the wrong side of history come thick or thin.
 
2013-03-26 10:28:20 AM  
1996 is a bit early on BO. We should probably go from the last time they said they supported gay marriage and didn't follow that up with a complete contradiction.
 
2013-03-26 10:28:35 AM  

Jaws_Victim: tenpoundsofcheese: 0bama in 1996??
Fail.

He didn't support it until last year.

In his 2008 campaign he was against it.

Came for this. Obama voter and gay man, annoyed me he used his "evolving" position as a means to a political end in a time of uncertainty. But I recognize this is how politics works, its just incredibly phony.


he had an opportunity and he blew it.
If it weren't for Biden, 0bama wouldn't have "evolved" so quickly.

Biden is the leader on this issue, 0bama - not even close.
 
2013-03-26 10:31:43 AM  

dletter: namatad: this will be interesting ...
will TRUE CONSERVATIVES (tm) still run on an anti-gay-marriage platform??

Will the GOP remove that position from its website and platform?
We know that they will still secretly hate the gays and marriage ...

Doesn't really matter what they 'secretly feel', as long as they are voting for what they publicly say they believe.


it is a slippery slope
I also find that people who change their "views" to be politically expedient a bit scary.
I went to my first gay wedding in 85. I have always found it strange and unacceptable that discrimination was so rampant.
 
2013-03-26 10:32:08 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Jaws_Victim: tenpoundsofcheese: 0bama in 1996??
Fail.

He didn't support it until last year.

In his 2008 campaign he was against it.

Came for this. Obama voter and gay man, annoyed me he used his "evolving" position as a means to a political end in a time of uncertainty. But I recognize this is how politics works, its just incredibly phony.

he had an opportunity and he blew it.
If it weren't for Biden, 0bama wouldn't have "evolved" so quickly.

Biden is the leader on this issue, 0bama - not even close.


In reality if it weren't for the positive reaction to Biden's comments, Obama wouldn't have "evolved" so quickly.
Biden didn't lead the way. He floated a trial balloon successfully
 
2013-03-26 10:32:57 AM  
ah yes it is very important to point out that the first sitting president in all of US history to support gay marriage doesn't really count or some shiat
 
2013-03-26 10:33:39 AM  
Coincidentally, this is also a timeline of when members of the hive of scum & villainy known as Free Republic began to hate the GOP members listed by saying such hispterish things as, "HE WUZ ALWAYS A RINO, THAT HEATHENOUS, TRAITOR, SODOMITE TRASH! I ALWAYS HATED HIM!"
 
2013-03-26 10:34:33 AM  
also did you guys know that the letter O is similar to the arabic  numeral zero?
 
2013-03-26 10:35:18 AM  
O, 0, makes you think
 
2013-03-26 10:35:23 AM  

mrshowrules: tenpoundsofcheese: 0bama in 1996??
Fail.

He didn't support it until last year.

In his 2008 campaign he was against it.

He was for it before he was against and for it again.  It is in the article if you would have read it.


I read the article, that is where I saw they claimed he started to support gay marriage in 1996.

Call me old fashioned, but I don't think you are supporting something if you are vocally against something when you are campaigning and when you are in office.
 
2013-03-26 10:35:58 AM  
CHENEY 2016!!!!

*flees thread*
 
2013-03-26 10:36:24 AM  

Jackson Herring: ah yes it is very important to point out that the first sitting president in all of US history to support gay marriage doesn't really count or some shiat


you are missing the point.
Put 0bama down as 2012, not 1996 and it is fine and accurate.
 
2013-03-26 10:36:27 AM  

Jackson Herring: ah yes it is very important to point out that the first sitting president in all of US history to support gay marriage doesn't really count or some shiat


it is important to note that he has played politics with the issue though, isn't it?  Or is that another fat dog and furthermore?
 
2013-03-26 10:36:53 AM  

Jackson Herring: O, 0, makes you think


0.O

/boggles the mind
 
2013-03-26 10:37:12 AM  

dletter: Hagel, a former Republican Senator, is pressed on whether he'd allow gay soldiers to get married on military bases: "What we don't want...is that we don't want someone to be denied to be married in a chapel or a facility and so on."

Can someone comment on if "military base" religious facilities fall under a different "realm" than just religious facilities in general?

Because, my whole argument about that Homosexual marriage should be legal is that we are only talking about "Legal" marriages, ie. getting a state-sponsored marriage licence.... NOT forcing or mandating any specific churches to perform same-sex marriages in their buildings or by their clergy.  Although, hey, I'd love all the religious institutions to get into the 21st century, that is going to be a major non-starter if that is part of the "law".  But, the main argument is that, a "Legal" marriage is not the same thing as a Religious marriage/wedding "ritual", and that allowing same-sex marriages "legally" does not force churches to perform them.

He seems to be going to that level.. but, again, is that because those chapels a "government" building, vs. non-military churches/chapels?


Typically, the chapel on a military base is used by multiple different religious groups. The building is owned by the US government. Denying a service member the use of the chapel would be like denying someone the use of the courthouse for a civil marriage. That does not mean that chaplains will be required to officiate, only that the US government will allow equal access to government owned facilities.
 
2013-03-26 10:37:31 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Giltric: During their campaign before an election?

What did I win?

Holy cow. I did not know the democrats were such a pandering bunch. Haha, kidding, I always knew they were a pandering bunch.

True. The Republicans are firm in their bigotry. You can always count on them to support discrimination without concern for the views of the people. They will remain on the wrong side of history come thick or thin.


they weren't filibustering civil rights legislation.  that was the dems
 
2013-03-26 10:38:09 AM  

xanadian: CHENEY 2016!!!!


That sounds like an appropriate length of sentence.
 
2013-03-26 10:39:45 AM  
Addressing Bush's position on the amendment, Cheney said: "At this point, say, my own preference is as I've stated, but the president makes policy for the administration. He's made it clear that he does, in fact, support a constitutional amendment on this issue."

"Most states have addressed this and there is on the books the federal statute, the Defense of Marriage Act, passed in 1996, and to date, it has not been successfully challenged in the courts and may be sufficient to resolve the issue," the vice president said.


"Sure I might think gays should be allowed to marry, but Bush doesn't think so, and we got DOMA already, so whatcha gonna do? It's not like I'm in a position of power to change anyone's mind. This isn't a war we're talking about."

So brave.
 
2013-03-26 10:40:22 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Philip Francis Queeg: Giltric: During their campaign before an election?

What did I win?

Holy cow. I did not know the democrats were such a pandering bunch. Haha, kidding, I always knew they were a pandering bunch.

True. The Republicans are firm in their bigotry. You can always count on them to support discrimination without concern for the views of the people. They will remain on the wrong side of history come thick or thin.

they weren't filibustering civil rights legislation.  that was the dems


Yes, and that very same Dem became Republican when he realized where the true home of bigotry was.
 
2013-03-26 10:41:25 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Jackson Herring: ah yes it is very important to point out that the first sitting president in all of US history to support gay marriage doesn't really count or some shiat

you are missing the point.
Put 0bama down as 2012, not 1996 and it is fine and accurate.


i3.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-03-26 10:41:25 AM  

WaitWhatWhy: dletter: Hagel, a former Republican Senator, is pressed on whether he'd allow gay soldiers to get married on military bases: "What we don't want...is that we don't want someone to be denied to be married in a chapel or a facility and so on."

Can someone comment on if "military base" religious facilities fall under a different "realm" than just religious facilities in general?

Because, my whole argument about that Homosexual marriage should be legal is that we are only talking about "Legal" marriages, ie. getting a state-sponsored marriage licence.... NOT forcing or mandating any specific churches to perform same-sex marriages in their buildings or by their clergy.  Although, hey, I'd love all the religious institutions to get into the 21st century, that is going to be a major non-starter if that is part of the "law".  But, the main argument is that, a "Legal" marriage is not the same thing as a Religious marriage/wedding "ritual", and that allowing same-sex marriages "legally" does not force churches to perform them.

He seems to be going to that level.. but, again, is that because those chapels a "government" building, vs. non-military churches/chapels?

Typically, the chapel on a military base is used by multiple different religious groups. The building is owned by the US government. Denying a service member the use of the chapel would be like denying someone the use of the courthouse for a civil marriage. That does not mean that chaplains will be required to officiate, only that the US government will allow equal access to government owned facilities.


Nobody gets married in the base chapel anyway. It mainly gets used for retirement ceremonies.
 
2013-03-26 10:41:57 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Jackson Herring: ah yes it is very important to point out that the first sitting president in all of US history to support gay marriage doesn't really count or some shiat

you are missing the point.
Put 0bama down as 2012, not 1996 and it is fine and accurate.


Why are you spelling the President's name incorrectly?
 
2013-03-26 10:42:02 AM  
Sounds like this is a done deal.
 
2013-03-26 10:42:43 AM  

Jackson Herring: ah yes it is very important to point out that the first sitting president in all of US history to support gay marriage doesn't really count or some shiat


Look, let's ignore all the pro-LGBT acts this administration took from Day 1. They're cowards. Dick Cheney was affected personally and changed his mind, so he's a hero even though he did nothing whatsoever to actually help people.

Cheney - 1, 0bama - O
 
2013-03-26 10:43:13 AM  

skullkrusher: Jackson Herring: ah yes it is very important to point out that the first sitting president in all of US history to support gay marriage doesn't really count or some shiat

it is important to note that he has played politics with the issue though, isn't it?


Only when it is politically advantageous to do so.
 
2013-03-26 10:43:33 AM  

JusticeandIndependence: Why are you spelling the President's name incorrectly?


Because people will comment on it. He's a child crying for attention.
 
2013-03-26 10:43:41 AM  

Jackson Herring: O, 0, makes you think



Study it out.
 
2013-03-26 10:43:59 AM  
Looks like Biden got the ball rollin'.

Good on him.
 
2013-03-26 10:44:06 AM  

Car_Ramrod: Jackson Herring: ah yes it is very important to point out that the first sitting president in all of US history to support gay marriage doesn't really count or some shiat

Look, let's ignore all the pro-LGBT acts this administration took from Day 1. They're cowards. Dick Cheney was affected personally and changed his mind, so he's a hero even though he did nothing whatsoever to actually help people.

Cheney - 1, 0bama - O


BUT BUT PLAYING POLITICS, DOESN'T COUNT
 
2013-03-26 10:44:11 AM  
So, in order to constantly attack 0bama, conservatives support marriage equality now, because 0bama has waffled on the issue.

th08.deviantart.net
 
2013-03-26 10:44:59 AM  

JusticeandIndependence: tenpoundsofcheese: Jackson Herring: ah yes it is very important to point out that the first sitting president in all of US history to support gay marriage doesn't really count or some shiat

you are missing the point.
Put 0bama down as 2012, not 1996 and it is fine and accurate.

Why are you spelling the President's name incorrectly?


He's not. That's the traditional Kenyan spelling.
 
2013-03-26 10:45:03 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: mrshowrules: tenpoundsofcheese: 0bama in 1996??
Fail.

He didn't support it until last year.

In his 2008 campaign he was against it.

He was for it before he was against and for it again.  It is in the article if you would have read it.

I read the article, that is where I saw they claimed he started to support gay marriage in 1996.

Call me old fashioned, but I don't think you are supporting something if you are vocally against something when you are campaigning and when you are in office.


Because politicians always campaign for this they believe it?  Most Liberals knew where his heart was and how you have to play politics.  Just like Romney/Ryan always wanted to protect Medicare and the poor *wink*wink*.
 
Displayed 50 of 159 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report