L.A. gay pride parade darkened by U.S. stance on marriage

[Better Believe It]

L.A. gay pride parade darkened by U.S. stance on marriage
As they celebrate the 40th anniversary of the beginning of the gay rights movement, gays feel let down by Obama. Mayors Villaraigosa and Newsom take their side against Defense of Marriage Act.
By Michael Finnegan
Los Angeles Times
June 15, 2009

The mayors of Los Angeles and San Francisco joined gay rights groups Sunday in raising concerns about the Obama administration's defense of a federal law restricting same-sex marriage.

"I think it's a big mistake," San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said shortly before he and his Los Angeles counterpart, Antonio Villaraigosa, kicked off the annual L.A. Pride parade in West Hollywood.

Rodney Scott, president of Christopher Street West, the parade's chief sponsor, said he was "deeply saddened" that Obama's administration was defending the marriage law.

"That's not the president I voted for," he said as thousands of people lining Santa Monica Boulevard cheered the procession of marchers and floats.

Bill Rosendahl, a gay member of the Los Angeles City Council and early Obama supporter, was equally blunt.

"I'm very upset with him on everything he's done regarding us so far," he said.

Please read the complete article at:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gaypride15-2009jun15,0,1449845.story

[Skittles]

1. STAY LOUD AND STAY PROUD BROTHERS AND SISTERS

WE WILL PREVAIL

[liberalmuse]

2. I have a very wide stance when it comes to marriage.

If two sentient beings who are able to consent to marriage consent to marriage, they should be allowed to marry. What is the big fucking deal?

[jgraz]

3. Let's call it what it is: The *Obama* stance on marriage

At this point, he owns it.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

4. actually U.S stance, or DoJ stance would be most accurate

since the DoJ has to defend the government when it is sued(even if they vehemently disagree with it ), and if the DoJ follows its rules they would not be informing the president about their briefs since they are supposed to be autonomous from the WH.

As long as its law, the DoJ will be forced to defend it when people sue the government on it, the only way they can really stop is if the law is changed(not always followed but thats what their job is)

[jgraz]

5. Obama needs to explicitly denounce and reject the DOJ language

Until he does that, he's giving that obscene reasoning his tacit approval.

Key word: tacit. Disappointingly so.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

6. that however would be politicizing the case, and thats one thing Obama is trying to avoid

Besides i am of the view the brief is/was more or less harmless as it pointed to laws between US states that strengthened its case, not gays and incest/pedophiles.

In my eyes, anybody who claims that the writers of the brief was purposefully calling gays the two above things then they must also be of the view that a majority of the American states support incest(since first cousin marriage is legal in 26 of them i believe).

A number of others permit marriage of 16 year olds(with some restrictions/permissions needed)which would in that case make those states pedophile states(and i don't think anybody really wish to make that claim.)

I can however understand the emotions the case brought up, especially the way some have spun it on the web and in the media, and Obama has said what he plans to say i think which was that the DoJ will defend the laws of the land until they are changed as is their duty, and he is still committed to getting that law changed(he does need to smack congress around a bit tho so they can give him a bill to sign since he has been lacking in that area)

[jgraz]

7. It's been five months

Five months of silence after Rick Warren, Prop 8, DADT dismissals, and now this. So many lost opportunities to speak out.

Obama needs to show the gay community that he supports them as much as they supported him last fall.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

8. On that we do agree

I simply think that its wrong to attack Obama in regards to the brief, he has done enough missteps personally to point at, we do not need to attribute things thats he is not responsible for on him(if blame is to be put on anybody its Holder, tho my view on the case was stated above)

I do wish both congress and Obama would show some proper initiative in this area tho, even if they have their hands full currently(Obama atleast, congress seems to be sitting on theirs)

[DURHAM D]

12. I just love it when straight people tell us idiot gay folk what to think. n/t

[Bodhi BloodWave]

13. Where have i told you what to think and where did i call you idiots?

Am i forbidden to give my own opinion on things?

[Raster]

9. I want to thank you, jgraz. I know you are a straight guy, but you've been a staunch ally

to all of us GLBT folks on DU. Thank you. We KNOW we can ALWAYS count on you for your support.

Thank you!:kick:

[jgraz]

10. Always have been, always will be

Well, except for those awkward early teen years, but you know how touchy we straight guys are about our sexuality. ;)

[Wednesdays]

11. K&R

:kick:

[Hieronymus]

14. I agree with the letter ... Obama has been wrong on gay rights so far.