Obama Picks Gay Athletes to Represent U.S. at Sochi Olympics!

Janet Napolitano will lead the U.S. delegation to the opening ceremonies

This, to me, seems like dissing the US athletes. Why should she even be there, much less performing that action.

fomalhaut
reply to post by roadgravel

 

While Obama's motives for such a move are suspect and could be referred to as "political BS", I don't think equal rights for gays is BS. Besides, the Olympics have been rife with politics throughout history.

Gays have the same rights as anyone else in the US.

Let me just head you off at the pass: Marriage is a right for no one. It is not a right.

Someone refusing to marry you is not violating any civil right of yours.

reply to post by Britguy


It's an issue because gays are still being discriminated against. And no, you don't have to mention your sexuality because you are assumed to be straight until proven otherwise. Gays are like straight people - some mention their bedroom antics, some flaunt their sexuality, and many are silent when it comes to sex.

At least send Janet Reno in case a fight breaks out. She can clear out a bar of drunken commies like no other.

Putin embarrassed Obama over Syria. Putin is ex KGB. A bad man. Best not play with fire.

reply to post by catfishjoe


Obama now pics the Olympic team ??????

what does the US Olympic committee do ??

reply to post by TheWrightWing


The benefits extended by marriage are a right. Having legal recognition as being in a serious, long-term relationship with a partner is a right. Sponsoring a partner for a green card is a right.

reply to post by ignorant_ape


Your name is most befitting good sir. Obama doesn't pick the Olympic team - merely the delegation.

fomalhaut
reply to post by Britguy

 

It's an issue because gays are still being discriminated against. And no, you don't have to mention your sexuality because you are assumed to be straight until proven otherwise. Gays are like straight people - some mention their bedroom antics, some flaunt their sexuality, and many are silent when it comes to sex.

[snipped]

So, would heterosexuals get away with this sort of government sanctioned, public perversion?

Some animals are More Equal than others, aren't they?

I think Putin never tires of Schooling our POTUS in the ways of the world.

Chicago thug tactics are playground antics where the big boys play. Easily ignored or shoved aside. It's like watching a Professional boxer taking on a loud mouthed Sheldon. LOL

You'd think Obama would learn.

fomalhaut
reply to post by TheWrightWing

 

The benefits extended by marriage are a right. Having legal recognition as being in a serious, long-term relationship with a partner is a right. Sponsoring a partner for a green card is a right.

I must have missed that bit in the Bill of Rights, perhaps you can point them out?

Reminder: The Pursuit of Happiness does not mean Guarantee of Happiness.

Carry on.

reply to post by TheWrightWing


If you stereotype everyone who holds different ideologies you'll soon find yourself in an echo chamber. One can think and say at homosexuality is wrong all they want. But when they support laws that enforce their beliefs on others, they've gone too far.

reply to post by TheWrightWing


the bill of rights is a living document
it was/is not the be all end all of human rights
it was intended to be amended and revised as new circumstances arose and the population underwent natural developments
(and using the lack of position taken by our forefathers as some kind of support for your...in my opinion.... biased and unethical stance is pretty disgusting)

your lack of understanding in that alone is fairly disturbing

fomalhaut
If you stereotype everyone who holds different ideologies you'll soon find yourself in an echo chamber. One can think and say at homosexuality is wrong all they want. But when they support laws that enforce their beliefs on others, they've gone too far.

You forgot to support your assertion with any sort of documentation. Where in the Bill of Rights is Marriage, or its benefits identified as a right for anyone?

Well?

sirhumperdink
the bill of rights is a living document
it was/is not the be all end all of human rights
it was intended to be amended and revised as new circumstances arose and the population underwent natural developments

your lack of understanding in that alone is fairly disturbing

I find it interesting that a certain sort insist that the Bill of Rights is plastic and pliable, as if to suggest that Freedom of Speech is only a right because enough agree.

Human rights exist outside of and pre-date any government, government does not grant you rights, a good government recognises them.

An understanding a certain sort who prefer the state have massive power over the individual, dependably seem to lack.

reply to post by fomalhaut


read the thread title

fomalhaut
reply to post by TheWrightWing

 

If you stereotype everyone who holds different ideologies you'll soon find yourself in an echo chamber. One can think and say at homosexuality is wrong all they want. But when they support laws that enforce their beliefs on others, they've gone too far.

You say your from Tiawan, I'm in the US, but this is Russias laws we are talking about. It's up to them to change THEIR laws. Not others from other countries. The US and others have tried that pretty recently and it has not turned out well for everybody involved.

If Russia wants to ban homosexual media, and the majority are behind it, then that is their business. But for Obama doing what he is doing is like a little kid saying..."Oh! Oh! I'm still here! I'm still relevent!"

I'll bet Putin is laughing his ass off about now.

If Obama really wanted to make a impact, the US would have boycotted the Olympics...but that would look pretty petty as well.

TheWrightWing

sirhumperdink
the bill of rights is a living document
it was/is not the be all end all of human rights
it was intended to be amended and revised as new circumstances arose and the population underwent natural developments

your lack of understanding in that alone is fairly disturbing

I find it interesting that a certain sort insist that the Bill of Rights is plastic and pliable, as if to suggest that Freedom of Speech is only a right because enough agree.

Human rights exist outside of and pre-date any government, government does not grant you rights, a good government recognises them.

An understanding a certain sort who prefer the state have massive power over the individual, dependably seem to lack.

the bill of rights is plastic and pliable and it was always intended to be
hell it was amended almost immediately after its inception to include things that were initially overlooked

and arguably the government does grant you rights..... slavery (which was not initially an issue adressed by the bill of rights) and persecution for speech still exist in many places these are not in fact natural rights (though that would just be super duper awesome) but are rights determined and granted by the collective populace usually through a governing body (though that does not have to be the case)
if these were god given rights they would be universal would they not?

your claims do not hold up in the real world

TheWrightWing

fomalhaut
reply to post by TheWrightWing

 

The benefits extended by marriage are a right. Having legal recognition as being in a serious, long-term relationship with a partner is a right. Sponsoring a partner for a green card is a right.

I must have missed that bit in the Bill of Rights, perhaps you can point them out?

Reminder: The Pursuit of Happiness does not mean Guarantee of Happiness.

Carry on.

Look in the fourteenth amendment

TextSection 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

reply to post by Fylgje


You hit the nail on the head. According to the Williams Institute, roughly 8 million out of 313 million people in the United States are LGBT. That's 2.5% of the American population.

I just don't get all the "hype".

Now, on topic. I think they'll return unharmed.

I love the idea that people are becoming more acceptable of all communities. I just can't shake the feeling this is all political. Did the gay people deserved to be picked is my question or is Obama trying to shake Putin and raise his own pr?