5 posts tagged “presidential candidates”

The McFreeds would like to share the following...

This is an excerpt from the New York Times interview from the June 13, 2008 issue.

Q: President Bush believes that gay couples should not be permitted to adopt children. Do you agree with that?

Mr. McCain: I think that we’ve proven that both parents are important in the success of a family so, no I don’t believe in gay adoption.

Q: Even if the alternative is the kid staying in an orphanage, or not having parents.

Mr. McCain: I encourage adoption and I encourage the opportunities for people to adopt children I encourage the process being less complicated so they can adopt as quickly as possible. And Cindy and I are proud of being adoptive parents.

Q: But your concern would be that the couple should a traditional couple

Mr. McCain: Yes.

The McFreeds share the following letter from Barack Obama with you...

Barack Obama

Dear Friends,

Thank you for the opportunity to welcome everyone to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club's Pride Breakfast and to congratulate you on continuing a legacy of success, stretching back thirty-six years.  As one of the oldest and most influential LGBT organizations in the country, you have continually rallied to support Democratic candidates and causes, and have fought tirelessly to secure equal rights and opportunities for LGBT Americans in California and throughout the country.  

As the Democratic nominee for President, I am proud to join with and support the LGBT community in an effort to set our nation on a course that recognizes LGBT Americans with full equality under the law. That is why I support extending fully equal rights and benefits to same-sex couples under both state and federal law.  That is why I support repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy, and the passage of fully inclusive laws to protect LGBT Americans from hate crimes and employment discrimination. And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states.

For too long, issues of LGBT rights have been exploited by those seeking to divide us. It's time to move beyond polarization and live up to our founding promise of equality by treating all our citizens with dignity and respect. This is no less than a core issue about who we are as Democrats and as Americans.

Finally, I want to congratulate all of you who have shown your love for each other by getting married these last few weeks. My thanks again to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club for allowing me to be a part of today's celebration.  I look forward to working with you in the coming months and years, and I wish you all continued success. 

Sincerely,  
Barack Obama

Sean reports...

Dr James Dobson

Dr. James Dobson of Focus on The Family said the following on the radio yesterday in response to a speech (link to text) by presumptive Democratic Party nominee Barack Obama to the Call To Renewal's Building A Covenant For New America on June 28, 2006:

"He's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own world view, his own confused theology."

Dobson, Tom Minnery, and Dr Bill Maier go on to talk about how Obama talks about the application of Bible teachings from Leviticus and Deuteronomy in the Old Testament. Both Dobson and Minnery talk about how the Levitical law no longer applies today because it was only meant to apply to the Israelites after they came out of the desert. And in the same breath they say that the principles - such as on the issue of same-sex marriage - still apply.

HUH?

Does that make any sense? Aren't these two then doing what they are accusing Obama of doing?

Dobson even says that he isn't a reverand and a Bible expert but then responds to Obama like he is. For me I thought faith was a personal gift to yourself; a tool guided by your personal covenant with God and your own intrepretation of his vessels/prophets dictating a higher power's word - be it the Jewish God, the Catholic God, the Protestant God, the Islamic God, Buddha, Vishnu, or what even being your faith recognizes (Not to leave other faiths or Jewish/Christian/other denominations/sects out, I do want to say I am condensing here). In the end it is all a personal interpretation of how to live one's life well with the people and environment around us.  My personal view in this instance is in deference to Jesus Christ's declaration of a Golden Rule in the Bible's New Testament, "Love thy neighbor as thyself."

I respect Dobson's right to give his opinion and have it heard. Many Christians utilize 1 Corinthians by Saint Paul as a counter to Levitical Law and maybe this is where Dobson and Minnery are coming from. But is it right to accuse people of hypocrisy and commit it in the same breath using his own interpretation? Funny how people don't even listen to their own voice sometimes.

For instance, Dobson and Minnery agree there are other faiths in America but since Christianity is the majority their views and morality should take precedence.

On the other side, Dobson and Minnery take presumptive Republican presidential nominee to task for not villifying same-sex marriage stong enough and supporting anti-gay marriage amendments on the state ballot in several states in November. So no side is left out in criticism from Dobson's moral view in this radio presentation.

It's funny to listen to someone feign that he isn't an expert than go on like he is and at the same time accuse someone of reinterpretation of the Bible while doing it in the same breath.

I will let you decide though in your own mind if Dobson is right or not. In deference to Dobson, here is a link to the full radio show. I am all for at least respecting disparaging views even though I think they are without real reason and hypocritical.

Sean says...

Respect for one's country is one thing, is wearing it really necessary? Does not wearing a flag pin or patriotic garb mean we are any less loving of our nation? When is symbolism too much?

I don't usually agree with CNN commentator and columnist Roland Martin but today he really hit the nail on the head. When are we as people going to let silly issues like this one go and concentrate on issues? Probably never, since we hold on to things we can understand and ignore things we don't. This is an easy issue that gets people fired up unlike poverty.. I mean some Boston Red Sox fans will never vote for a New York Yankees fan, but sometimes you have too.

But is not wearing something desecration or ambivilence? I don't think so. We all support our free will to make decisions, should we really be throwing rocks at glass houses on who is more of something? If we did that noone would get along. Is what we do to show our patriotism or any other personal feeling about our lives, loves, country, or religion anyone else's business as long as it does not harm or personally insult someone?

(CNN) -- When is the last time you watched a mindless movie that had no redeeming value for you intellectually, but all it did was make you laugh?

That perfectly describes the raging debate among voters and the rabid television and radio talk show hosts who love to yell and scream from the top of their lungs, "I'm an American, and by golly, you better show as much appreciation for this country as I do!"

But once you finish listening to these high-minded bloviators -- and yes, that includes the voters who have bought into this nonsensical issue -- ask yourself: Does it really have anything to do with anything?

I've watched this debate reach the levels of absurdity this year because journalists and commentators have raised the question to Sen. Barack Obama, "Why don't you wear a flag lapel pin?"

I really got a kick out of that one during the ABC debate last month because not one person on stage -- Sens. Hillary Clinton and Obama, along with moderators Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos -- bothered to accessorize their attire with a flag lapel pin.

Sen. John McCain has been traveling the globe as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, and this former soldier often doesn't wear a flag lapel pin.

It has become sort of like bird watching as I've surveyed elected officials on the local and national levels and looked them over like a hen-pecked mother or a foaming-at-the-mouth military drill sergeant, studying their attire and deeming them insufficiently American because of their lack of decency and respect by refusing to adorn themselves appropriately with a lapel pin.

So, after listening to radio callers and the folks that e-mail various TV shows, maybe we ought to expand this need to express our Americanism even further. Shouldn't we insist that our politicians all begin to sport red, white and blue socks in order to feel good knowing that they are walking as Americans? How about asking officeholders to sport the American colors as undergarments to show that their undying love for the country is so important, they want the flag pressed against their skin?

There have been times when the candidates -- especially McCain, who has beaten back skin cancer -- have worn hats on the campaign trail. I want to know, datgummit, why the people running for the highest office in the land didn't cover their head with an American flag baseball cap to express to the nation their love and affection for the U.S. of A.

Since it is clear that our nation is paralyzed and so not able to close our borders, feed the homeless, develop businesses in the inner cities and save people from having their homes taken by foreclosure due to ruthless mortgage companies, all because some folks don't wear a flag lapel pin, we need to lead a national movement to demand that Congress and the states make requiring officeholders to wear a flag lapel pin the 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

See, if it is so important, then take it all the way. Don't make it optional. Don't leave it up to someone to choose to wear a flag lapel pin. Let's really show those politicians that nothing is more important to us than seeing them with the U.S. flag on our chest.

That's what zealots do. They take something so simple, so personal, so voluntary, and absolutely lose their mind, trying to force someone else to do as them, and everyone else be damned.

Folks, the first year I ever cast a ballot for political office was in 1988. And in the last 20 years, whether it was mayoral, school board, city council, or a statewide, congressional or presidential campaign, the thought of what was on a politician's lapel never entered into the equation as to whether they are worthy of office.

Those who will criticize me will say, "Well, Roland, if it's no big deal, then why not wear one?" And the reply is the same: "If it's no big deal, then why do you make it a big deal?"

Let me tell you something: When I'm on the golf course and I slip my wedding ring into my golf bag, the Rev. Jacquie Hood Martin is still my wife. When we shoot hoops and I remove my Texas A&M University ring from my right hand, I still love my school. The fact that I can no longer wear my 1987 class ring from Houston's Jack Yates High School doesn't mean I don't cherish the crimson and gold. And I may not be able to fit into the shirt I pledged in, but I will be a member of Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity Inc. until the day I die.

I am an unapologetic Christian, but you won't see a cross dangling from my neck or a James Avery charm bracelet on my wrist. Why? Because my love of Jesus Christ is in my heart.

This debate is useless, tiresome and distracting. Why? Because if there are members of Congress who wear a flag lapel pin but refuse to shore up our borders, don't do enough to stop the flow of drugs into our neighborhoods, or don't help to eradicate the gaps between the haves and have nots, then are they truly fighting for the concerns of Americans, or playing on the emotions of people by what's on their lapel?

We're better than that. We're smarter than that. It's time that we make decisions based on substance, which is what we say we actually care about. But maybe we're just lying to ourselves about that, too.

Roland S. Martin is a nationally award-winning journalist and CNN contributor. Martin is studying to receive his master's degree in Christian communications at Louisiana Baptist University.You can read more of his columns at http://www.rolandsmartin.com/

The McFreeds, in the interest of equal time, post this speech from March 18, 2008 for your review...

This does not mean we are giving up on our support on Hillary Clinton, it means only that this speech is major enough to make available to our readers.