Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
Last night, President Obama's campaign announced that he was "disappointed" in North Carolinians' overwhelming support of a constitutional amendment in support of traditional marriage law.
It was an interesting thing to say in that President Obama also claims to support traditional marriage laws and oppose redefining marriage to include same-sex arrangements or other groupings.
Word comes out today that the President plans to give an interview this afternoon to Good Morning America anchor Robin Roberts "clarifying" his position on the matter.
What do you think he should do? His current position -- that he supports traditional marriage law while opposing state-level support of same -- is not currying him favor with either side. What type of clarification will help him?
- Comment (52)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
May '10
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.:
It was an interesting thing to say in that President Obama also claims to support traditional marriage laws and oppose redefining marriage to include same-sex arrangements or other groupings.
Anyone who can't see by now that lying is an essential element in this President's modus operandi, as it was for Communists, is stupid or naive or both. His aim is to manipulate. That's what he think politics is about. He thinks he's supremely good at it.
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
I don't think there is any position that "helps" any politician on gay marriage. Each side sees it as pass/fail without compromise.
The only way to compromise is to find a way for gays to marry without asking others to abandon their religious principles.
That appears to be as elusive as the Higgs Boson.
Edited on May 9, 2012 at 4:01pmRe: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
Apparently there are 13,000 signatures on a petition demanding the DNC get its convention out of Charlotte, North Carolina. BuzzFeedBen tweets "This threatens to be a convention almost solely about gay rights." And Ryan Lizza tweets "Sr. BO adviser to me re: BO endorsing gay marriage: BO "may get around to it before this election but he certainly will after the election.""
Jun '11
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
He has always been for same-sex marriage. He just won't come out and say it because he does not want to disrupt his base of black voters, who are by a large majority against same sex marriages. But by effectuating the same policies as if he were "out of the closet" for same-sex marriages, and not actually saying it, he hopes to toe the line.
This political game makes me mad because:
1. it is dishonest, and
2. he thinks black voters are too stupid to realize what he is doing.
I would say that is racist, but I really think he believes all Americans, regardless of race, are that stupid.
Dec '11
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
Including civil unions in the amendment is a crying shame.
I have a hard time with both the conservative and liberal positions on this issue.
Jun '10
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
I think Obama will come out in support of gay marriage, and especially in support of wealthy gay couples (both working, with no kids in college) doing anything they want with a generous political contribution. Finally, freedom for that donor money. Free at last!
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
Ross Douthat has an interesting piece on this today. He says "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."
"If same-sex marriage isn’t an issue where people can disagree in good faith, though, then the president’s evasions and obfuscations can’t be treated as ordinary political maneuverings, and excused as just so much politics-as-usual. If the debate is as black and white as many supporters of same-sex marriage argue, then they should be much harder on political leaders who pretend that it’s a gray area."
He points out that this is a tough indictment of Obama and that a non-lap-dog press would be hammering him on it. The whole thing is interesting.
Feb '11
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
Guruforhire: Including civil unions in the amendment is a crying shame.
I have a hard time with both the conservative and liberal positions on this issue. · 0 minutes ago
Judges being what they are these days, you almost have to be absolute. And even that may not be sufficient.
Edited on May 9, 2012 at 4:11pmApr '11
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
I think it's a bid to get some free TV time. Easy for the President to look 'presidential' when he's telling us to be nice to a beleaguered minority. As usual he'll be short on specifics and the media won't be too inquisitive about the long term effects of his pandering. If you give one group of people privilege then other groups tend to become irritated. No one will equate this with how well he has done as a healer in terms of racial division. If he can keep most of the sanctimony out of his voice it ought to work out great for him.
Apr '11
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
Way to go North Carolina. Hey Pres. Dry up we don't care what you think. Can November get here soon enough.
Mar '11
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
This is all just part of the flexibility that Obama wants to make sure that Vladimir knows about.
Mar '11
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
Can Obama carry North Carolina again if he makes to big a deal out of something that 60% of their citizens supported?
Politically the better option here would have been for Obama to ignore this issue. Just pretend like it did not happen. It is not like the gay rights advocates are going to switch over and vote Republican because Obama ignored this vote
Edited on May 9, 2012 at 4:16pmDec '11
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
Israel Pickholtz
Guruforhire: Including civil unions in the amendment is a crying shame.
I have a hard time with both the conservative and liberal positions on this issue. · 0 minutes ago
Judges being what they are these days, you almost have to be absolute. And even that may not be sufficient. · 5 minutes ago
Edited 5 minutes ago
I generally agree that 95% of the problem is the liberal tendency to cram their social vision down other people's throats.
For instance, the health care law essentially outlawed catholics being catholic. Why would conservatives give an inch?
Jun '10
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
C'mon folks, this is an easy one.
1. Declare that children are best raised in a household of one man, one woman joined in marriage.
2. Offer gays the option of civil unions guaranteeing all the legal protections of marriage.
3. Allow that if a church chooses to marry two same sex people, the federal government has nothing to say about it other than to guarantee the protections listed in point two.
Obama has no core convictions which is why he's struggling with this issue. He thinks by pandering and offering ambiguity he can have it both ways. His mind is not agile enough to see the obvious compromise.
Jun '10
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
Ecdysis: He has always been for same-sex marriage. He just won't come out and say it because he does not want to disrupt his base of black voters, who are by a large majority against same sex marriages. But by effectuating the same policies as if he were "out of the closet" for same-sex marriages, and not actually saying it, he hopes to toe the line.
This political game makes me mad because:
1. it is dishonest, and
2. he thinks black voters are too stupid to realize what he is doing.
I would say that is racist, but I really think he believes all Americans, regardless of race, are that stupid. · 24 minutes ago
Precisely.
Mar '11
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
His political tactics are baffling to me. The battles he chooses to initiate seem more appropriate for a desperate challenger.
Dec '10
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
Krauthammer said Obama is slicing and dicing the electorate (the One? causing division?) in the hope of picking off enough factions to win. I think that's about right.
Catholics went for Obama 54/46 in 2008. This year, they're evenly split, even after the direct assault on Catholicism in the HHS mandate.
Let's not misunderstimate the man. I've noticed that one of his tactics is to garner admiration by being honest at the opportune political moment. This is likely to be another example.
Besides, we're not talking about the economy or unsustainable entitlement spending and the Democrats non-plan to deal with it, are we?
Dec '11
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
~Paules: C'mon folks, this is an easy one.
1. Declare that children are best raised in a household of one man, one woman joined in marriage.
2. Offer gays the option of civil unions guaranteeing all the legal protections of marriage.
3. Allow that if a church chooses to marry two same sex people, the federal government has nothing to say about it other than to guarantee the protections listed in point two.
Obama has no core convictions which is why he's struggling with this issue. He thinks by pandering and offering ambiguity he can have it both ways. His mind is not agile enough to see the obvious compromise. · 12 minutes ago
Liberal activists have no interest in actually solving this issue with a rational reasonable compromise. They demand total social acceptance and cultural submission. Actually trying to share the world is out of the question.
Nov '11
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
Tommy De Seno: I don't think there is any position that "helps" any politician on gay marriage. Each side sees it as pass/fail without compromise.
The only way to compromise is to find a way for gays to marry without asking others to abandon their religious principles.
That appears to be as elusive as the Higgs Boson. · 38 minutes ago
Edited 34 minutes ago
Tommy, the best compromise I can think of comes, I believe, out of California (it hurts me to admit that!): grant all gay couples civil unions (or a roughly equivalent term) that provide all the benefits and protections of marriage.
This satisfies the original (and justified!) impetus that commited gay couples should not be denied the same benefits commited straight couples by the state, and still preserves the term "marriage" for those who feel that there's a special relationship between opposite-sex couples.
The problem with offering this compromise is that the lobbies on either side would be unhappy - the gay-marriage proponents would claim that they're still being stigmatized, the straight-only marriage proponents could point to the Prop 8 mess in CA as proof it wouldn't work.
Jan '11
Re: Obama Plans Evolutionary Moment On Marriage Law
Obama is planning a change of mind.
No oxymoron there, right?