Obama: I’ve Made A Decision To Leave The Decision To States On Gay Marriage

For years, we have followed the painful display of Barack Obama trying to deal with same-sex marriage by finding the best political position for himself. Principle has never been part of the equation, of course. The decision whether to stop discrimination against homosexuals is clearly based on what would be the most useful to the President. The result has been rather ugly with Jay Carney prompting laughs with the recent position that the President has been clear that his position is unclear. Now the President has adopted another position tailored for the election.

The President has decided not to reach any conclusion on the right to marry but instead will leave it to the states. Here is Carney with the latest Obama position: “His belief, our belief [is] that this is a matter that states should decide.” There are a couple of problems with the statement. First, people have asked the President whether he personally supports same-sex marriage. The issue of whether state or federal governments have the principal voice is secondary to that question. Second, that threshold issue could have great importance to the secondary issue: if he believe that the ban is a form of discrimination, it may not be simply a state issue. Would Obama leave race or gender discrimination to the states?

As someone who strongly supports states rights, I generally like leaving things to the state but Obama’s position remains a rather transparent effort to avoid answering a question of principle.

There are profiles of courage in politics and this is not one of them.

Source: ABC

32 thoughts on “Obama: I’ve Made A Decision To Leave The Decision To States On Gay Marriage”

  1. For those who are unaware, Vistaprint is a website that has
    been around for years, and it offers a variety of personalized products that can be used for businesses, gifts,
    weddings, and more. Meredith’s mother suffered from Alzheimer’s in
    prior seasons. If necessary, place a polite
    reminder on your sign-in page that this is not an informal website, and
    that distasteful comments will be removed.

  2. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) and the United States Department of State (“DOS”) both apply a three-prong test to assess the validity of a marriage for immigration purposes. The following three-prong test is applied both in assessing eligibility for a derivative non-immigrant

  3. Why wasn’t Mr. Turley concerned about gays not having marriage when he was in college in the 1980’s or in the 1990’s??? Why now?? Why not have gay marriage 500 years ago?? Why today?? If it is okay today, why not 50 years ago?? Surely we were smart enough 50 years to think it up then…..I mean it is an invention, just appeared on the scene and everyone thinks it is a no brainer that we approve it. Sin is sin—Peter and Paul spoke against this over 50 times—–nobody ever has to go to a night club or a bar, or stay out late—–we all make choices everyday. Yes, I choose to be heterosexual——I like families and children and genealogy.

  4. Obama Administration Says Defense Of Marriage Act Is Unconstitutional

    SAN FRANCISCO — In a strongly worded legal brief, the Obama administration has said the federal act that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman was motivated by hostility toward gays and lesbians and is unconstitutional.

    The brief was filed Friday in federal court in San Francisco in support of a lesbian federal employee’s lawsuit claiming the government wrongly denied health coverage to her same-sex spouse.

    The Justice Department says Karen Golinski’s suit should not be dismissed because the law under which her spouse was denied benefits – the Defense of Marriage Act – violates the constitution’s guarantee of equal protection.

  5. Jay,

    When marriage law starts making people having to marry their brother’s widows, then we can talk about Biblical baggage. Heck, when it’s illegal for people with two different religions to get married, then we can talk about Biblical baggage. The fact is, modern marriage is not Biblical. Even the parties involved are different. We have a contract between the two people involved, in Biblical marriage, it was between the man (or his family) and the woman’s family.

    Churches already get to say in who they’ll host and officiate weddings for. It’s not like they’re legally obligated to perform the ceremony for any couple that walks through the door. The only difference would be that they’d be turning down two people of the same sex instead of a guy and a girl.

    Again, the States already deal with the legal part of it, and the churches already deal with “moral” part.

  6. If the States were still in charge of deciding whether they would allow or not allow slavery, President Obama would be counted in the census as 3/5ths of a person.

  7. The Democrats want to raise 1 billion dollars for election. That money could be spread out to the poor people, Adm Mullen sugessted to cut military pay. Obama will tell you we are bringing troops home. But we sent more troops over there every week. I jus recieved my medacare for being disabled. In our governments wisedom I was told if i dropped medicare I would loose my military healthcare called Tricare. Once Obamacare starts people will loose their jobs. employers could say a person is to unhealthy or or injured to be of use to them The president and congress need to take 5o% cut in pay, They tell us to suck it up and live within our means and they cant even set the example

  8. To quote Glenn Greenwald (from his article today)

    “One accumulates power by saying anything and everything necessary to acquire and hold onto it: one key reason I now all but disregard what Obama says, and watch only what he does.”

Comments are closed.