Gay Marriage Ban in North Carolinaaa

with the money i save on child porn i can afford tons of candy to distribute to my young friends at the local playground. i can also afford tinted 70s glasses and grooming equipment for my mustache

 

it is designed to force romney into a debate he wont win with moderates. obama's team calculated the exact point in history when it was politically advantageous to "evolve" his opinion. he waited until romney was certain to be his opponent and then put him on the defensive. it is the sort of political move that the obama team will continue to use to destroy romney in november.

 

I'm far from being an expert but feel it will help slightly. When it comes down to election time, I don't think a significant segment of the Southern and religious blacks will support Romney. One of my facebook friends (a Southern religious black woman) commented yesterday that she was not happy with Obama supporting gay marriage. By the time all of her (mostly black) friends replied (about half that disagreed), she agreed that she would still support Obama over Romney and I would think that's the norm.

I think the perception of the economy in a few months will have a much bigger impact on voters and gay marriage won't be a significant topic of discussion. Ignoring the re-election impact, I do think it was a good thing to have a sitting President endorse gay marriage.

 

yes. it is a debate romney cant win in the minds of moderates. and moderates might vote for him based on his superior econimic policy. but even middle american housewives dont hate gays anymore. in fact they are proud of having their first gay friend, which they acquired in 2009. so it takes swing votes from romney, further guaranteeing the total destruction and failure o him as a candidate.

 

true enough black religious folks do not like gays at all. but they dont care about that they will vote for a black man even if he is a jesse-jackso level idiot. all they care about is the blackness.

 

Black people and women are pretty thrilled that not everyone feels this way...

 

i agree with MLU for once. i think the states rights argument falls flat for moral issues, or at least issues that people believe are moral issues. i think a decent argument an be made for universal civil unions under the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. so again, the solution is that the government is far to everyone, granting everyone civil unions regardless of sex and if you are desperate to have your relationship defined as a marriage you can find a church that will do that for you.

 

Why can't they just create a new word that has the same legal rights as marriage? Gayrriage?