Comments

1
It's positive, for sure. But what are the legal ramifications? Could any president have done this? Does this end the entire argument or could legal challenges drag this one out for several more decades?

Is it really, after all this time, just as simple as one president saying "make it so"?
2
My dad, who is gay, recently passed away. His partner, and the rest of us, were with him in the hospital. The hospital staff were wonderful to my family and the whole thing was very peaceful and loving. I can't imagine it being any other way.

I'm very grateful that we live in a tolerant place. I am also very grateful that my dads got their paperwork in order ahead of his death and nobody had to second guess anybody's role at the hospital. If a nurse had told my dad's partner to get out of the room, things would have gotten very ugly.

Who ARE these people who want to separate families? And why?? I just don't get it.

It's nice that the president wrote a memo. It would have been nicer if the feds could just legalize gay marriage. Then the memo wouldn't have been necessary.
3
I am gay. I want my rights.
But.
Does the president have the power/authority to make such a declaration? This seems like an odd/scary use of executive coercion.

I don't want my president "moved." I don't want him issuing proclamations based on some temporary emotion. I want him thinking and acting on what is rational. Because if he can issue an edict giving, someone else can issue an edict taking away...
4
What is to stop the next president from doing the opposite?
5
I also wonder if the POTUS has the legal power to do this. What is to stop some hospital from just ignoring a memo from the Pres?
6
Good questions all. Dan?
7
As an NPR story points out, when President Johnson signed Medicare into law, there was a stipulation that to receive federal $$, any racially segregated hospitals would have to integrate or not receive any money.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p…

It would be great of Congress, in advance of the November elections, backs up President Obama's order with legislation to lock this down and thus, not be so easily overturned by a future president who doesn't share the same opinion.
8
I'm glad to see this happen, but I wonder what it means for the greater fight for equal marriage. If we keep piecemealing out additional rights traditionally associated with marriage to non-married homosexual couples, how is that different than "separate but equal?"

Why are we forcing hospitals to acknowledge these relationships as equal to married heteros, but not any other institutions?

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.