Ross Douthat in the New York Times says if same-sex proponents and journalists were consistent, they would be far more harsh on the President's waffling on marriage:
"...to say that the president’s approach is understandable does not mean that it’s necessarily defensible. Supporters of same-sex marriage have worked very hard to frame their issue, not as an ordinary political conflict, but as an all-or-nothing question that pits enlightenment and progress against reaction, bigotry and hate. I don’t accept that framing, but I accept that its architects genuinely believe in it, and see the conflict over same-sex unions as a clear-cut struggle between good and evil, with no possibility of middle ground.
...[but] if you accept the framing of the debate that many liberals (and many journalists) embrace, then you have to acknowledge that President Obama has spent the last four years lying to the American people about his convictions on one of the defining civil rights issues of our time, and giving aid and comfort to pure bigotry in the service of his other political priorities."
42 Comments
I love the way small mind think. Obama may have a personal belief about marriage but that doesn't mean he wants to legislate it. Much like a Jew does not believe in Jesus but is not against your freedom of worship.
Today's NY Times has an article extolling the ubiquity of same-sex couples on television on page one,and buries the crushing defeat of SSM in North Carolina on page A15.
Spin,spin,spin!
I hope that if Obama believes in SSM, he doesn't try to legislate it.
@3 Then why is it ok for conservatives to legislate their beliefs?
It's OK with me if Obama tries to legislate it.
It will seal his political defeat.
AD,
there's no reason for anyone across the political spectrum to pretend same-sex sexual relationships are of no lesser importance to humanity than opposite-sex ones.
Pete, The idea that one's personal religious beliefs and what one believes should be the law of the land may not be in perfect alignment is a bit too much for the average NOMer to wrap his narrow mind around. Don't bother trying, it might cause an anneurism.
BREAKING: Obama just endorsed same-sex marriage.
President Obama just made history again by becoming the first sitting POTUS to endorse marriage equality!!! Perfect timing after the disgusting display of ignorance and bigotry we witnessed in NC last night. He may still have personal religious beliefs about how marriage should be defined within his church that may not include gay couples. And that's fine. Unlike those who support enshrining religious based predjudice into constitutions, he smart enough and fair minded enough to understand that citizens of the U.S. should have their rights trampled on because of someone else's religious doctrine.
*should not
Well, I guess God must love Mitt Romney after all.......
Well, Mitt Romney's state enacted marriage equality while he was governor. The first state to do so, by the way. Maybe he should get credit!
Rick, Maybe you should keep you silly superstitions out of the debate.
Heh heh heh B73.
Maybe you should buckle up and get ready for the tidal wave.
BO had his band aid ripped off today, and now it's game on.
Marriage is a front burner issue in the election now, and that is exactly what Barack *didn't* want.
And exactly what we *did*.
Lol. I doubt Obama would have come out publicly in favor of same sex marriage if he *didn't* want that to be at the forefront...
Well, if that were true, Bryce, may I say that we are both perfectly satisfied with today's events.....
Even if only one of us is satisfied with yesterday's
Obama endorsing same-sex marriage is huge. It shows people how equality matters to him and shows the evolution of how he use to be to how he is now. If only some Republicans and religious leaders could exhibit this evolution. Of course since they don't believe in evolution and that we just somehow appeared here one day with fig leaves on our genitals, I suppose it's nothing to be surprised at.
I agree that Obama's endorsement is huge.
It has placed marriage corruption squarely in front and center for this year's election campaign.
Exactly where we wanted it.
Exactly where he didn;t
President Obama is listening to his paymasters, who have been putting increasing pressure on him. Suddenly it matters to him. That is how his version of evolution works.
He has evolved exactly where natural selection won;t allow him to remain in office
The North Carolina victory has completely changed the landscape for this election.
Mitt Romney, are you bold enough to recognize the opportunity this presents?
President Obama says he *personally* supports ssm but believes the individual states should decide the issue.
He's come out of the closet....as a federalist!
Rick ~~~ here's a virtual splash of cold water in your face to snap you out of your fantasy. Same-sex marriage ranks dead last among the issues influencing voters' presidential choice. Its less important than contraception. Even if half of this country's population opposes marriage equality, it doesn't mean that it's an important issue for them. You mistakenly believe that half the country is as rabidly anti-gay as you are. They're not. Your views are shared by a tiny segment of the population and that tiny homophobic demographic was going to vote R anyway. The swing voters in the middle who decide the election are moderates, not anti-gay zealots.
no 1 is corrupting marriage. no 1 is redefining anything. someday those of you who are afraid will wake up and know what is right.
He endorsed the redefinition of marriage way back when his Just-us Department said it would no longer defend DOMA. This told me he no longer believed in marriage. It was crystal clear to me then. (Telling the armed forces to normalize sodomy also put it into focus for those who cared to see, as well.) I watched that poor whipped dog, Jay Carney, speaking to the press the other day. They carved him UP on the issue. It was truly painful to watch. We need to pray for our country as St.(Padre) Pio said. Pray, Hope & Don't Worry.
B73:
Let us, for the sake of brevity, simply pass over every one of your points, just as if they were true.
The gaping hole in your argument 9is called the "swing states".
We will demonstrate in November.
Carry on
B73:
Let us, for the sake of brevity, simply pass over every one of your points, just as if they were true.
Your analysis fails to take into necessary account the swing states Obama must have for re-election.
We will demonstrate how important this oversight in your (and Team Obama's) strategy is, come November.
Carry on
B73:
Let us, for the sake of brevity, simply pass over every one of your points, just as if they were true.
Your analysis fails to take into necessary account the swing states Obama must have for re-election.
I think the message will be much clearer when the hilarious spectacle of the Democratic Convention in North Carolina moves onto the TV screens of Americans in those swing states.
Ah poster #12, that is nothing but hogwash. I live in MA and it was the courts that imposed SSM on us WITHOUT the consent of WE THE PEOPLE. It just so happens Mitt Romney was governor at the time.
Holding the marriage vote during a Republican primary shows how tepid voter enthusiasm has become for denying equal legal rights to gays and lesbians. Why not hold it during the general election, when everybody comes out to vote, not just Republicans???
Oh poster #26 the Dems were having state primaries as well. I too wish it was voted on in Nov. as the margin of victory would have been greater.
Primaries get poor voter turnout.
Jim,
There are four marriage votes scheduled for this November; still think support of truth is "tepid"
"Much like a Jew does not believe in Jesus but is not against your freedom of worship."
Where does that come in? What does that supposed to mean?
Is that like saying "Much like a Christian does not believe in Mohammed but is not against your freedom of worship?"
We hope it is not the expression of latent anti-Semitism.
Re: the headline.
No.
He has been lying to us for sixteen years.
He affirmed his support for gay marriage in 1996.
Then flipped.
Or flopped.
Or evolved.
Or devolved.
And then Revolved.
Take your pick.
President Obama is perfectly happy to promote class warfare and racial identity politics. Why should we be surprised he'd dabble in sexual identity politics, either? It's never about real equality--it's always about catering to a parituclar identity. Wonder what identity it'll be tomorrow?
Rick, sounds like a mean game of "Twister," no?
Rick.
Your posts.
With their fragmented style.
Don't help you get your point across.
Honestly.
It can be an eyesore.
Bryce:
Happy to be of irritation
Rick:
We know.
Obama #1 needs to state the argument that had convinced him to support the man-woman basis of marriage.
And, now, Obama #2 needs to state the argument that had convinced him that Obama#1 was wrong.
He is at odds with himself. If he can't provide the two arguments, without misrepresentations, then, his ambiguity was a political ploy and he has presented himself as an untrustworthy spokesman on the subject -- whatever "position" his political nose leads him to take at the moment.
Hopefully, Chairm, this divided house of Obama will not stand.
The house divided is a good metaphor.
But I was thinking more along the lines of Thing 1 and Thing 2 of the Cat In The Hat book.
Heh.