In yet another move designed to distract attention from his
abysmal record, the sluggish recovery, and continuing dismal
unemployment data, President Obama confirmed what anyone who paid
any attention to his actions and past statements already knew: the
president supports same-sex “marriage.”
Mr. Obama’s historic announcement is a watershed moment for the
nation. Across cultures and throughout history, marriage between a
man and a woman has been, as Cicero put it, the “first bond of
society.” Never before has a president endorsed a position that
would so “fundamentally transform” America. But wait, that is what
he promised to do in his 2008 campaign. His first term as president
has been evidence of fundamental alteration of the basic aspects of
American culture and society. Some think that Vice President Biden
jumped the gun — that Mr. Obama might have preferred to time his
announcement a bit differently. President Obama might possibly have
preferred to wait until after his hoped-for re-election before
publicly embracing such a controversial issue, but things are not
going so well in his 2012 campaign, what with him drawing only
half-full stadiums and lagging contributions. Plus, even Ruth
Marcus of the Washington Post was calling the president
“weak and evasive” as he tried to avoid stating the obvious.
It was an open secret that the president supported legalization
of same-sex “marriage” — on the record — as early as 1996, so his
comments about his position “evolving” put him in an untenably
wishy-washy position vis-à-vis his LGBT supporters.
Further, his 2010 statements about the “sacred” nature of marriage
and the importance of God being “in the mix” ring hollow in light
of his actions undermining marriage: He overturned “don’t ask,
don’t tell,” signed “hate crimes” legislation, stopped defending
the Defense of Marriage Act, and extended domestic benefits to the
same-sex partners of federal employees. If he is re-elected, the
sad undermining of holy matrimony and the disintegration of the
family will continue until these pillars of American society
shrivel into weak ruins of their former strength.
Clearly, the president had no choice but to “come out” for
same-sex “marriage”; it had become a matter of character and
integrity. Even his staunchest supporters were tired of the
“wink-wink and nod-nod.” Others believe the big announcement was
carefully orchestrated. First, he sent out Vice President Biden to
test the waters and extend the media life of his announcement. Arne
Duncan, Secretary of Education, quickly chimed in to agree. David
Axelrod, the president’s campaign manager, affirmed that the
president did, indeed, agree with the vice president. When the
president spoke (typically, out of both sides of his mouth and
trying to have it both ways), he also said it was a matter for the
individual states (in conflict with his position of not enforcing
the Defense of Marriage Act). And, of course, reporters like Amy
Walter, ABC’s political director, quickly declared the decision to
be a personal one, not one with a “political agenda.”
Sorry, Amy. The politics of the decision are clear. The
president is having a hard time raising money and generating
enthusiasm for 2012. At this point, he needs a big boost in both
money and enthusiasm.
After his big announcement — which was news to no one — he
raised $1 million in 90 minutes, not exactly chump change, but not
an avalanche either when he’s looking to raise a billion dollars to
fund his campaign. Analysts say that one in six of the president’s
major fundraisers is openly homosexual. Obviously, homosexual
activists will work even harder and will dig deeper into their deep
pockets to ensure his re-election. Andrew Tobias, treasurer of the
Democratic National Committee, said, “Within minutes, people were
calling with their credit cards. They’re thrilled.”
Some pundits are trying to claim that the president’s calculated
endorsement of the homosexual agenda will not hurt him with black
voters. The latest polls, though, confirm that blacks and Latinos
are among the strongest supporters of traditional marriage.
Further, traditional marriage has prevailed in all 32 states where
the issue has been put to a vote before the general public. In
those states where same-sex “marriage” has been instituted, it was
either by judicial fiat or legislative action. The president and
all his advisors might just discover that the nation is more
pro-marriage than the elites would like to think.
The president claimed that the marriage issue is “generational”
(older working-aged people, having gained both wisdom and
self-sufficiency, are not among Obama’s base). Sadly, Mr. Obama
used members of the military and his daughters as emotional fodder
for his televised statement, claiming that their desire for
equality is “the kind of thing that prompts a change in
perspective.” The president also linked his endorsement of
homosexual “marriage” to his campaign theme of “forward” by
claiming that the presumptive GOP candidate, Mitt Romney, would
“take us back.” In contrast, Mr. Romney, during one of the
televised primary debates, said, “3,000 years of human history
shouldn’t be discarded so quickly.”
The nation’s “progressive” elites think that they should be
allowed to re-write cultural mores and morals to suit their more
enlightened “change of perspective.” The risks of further
deterioration of marriage are clear in the social science research.
With 41 percent of the nation’s children being born out of wedlock,
America is reaping the whirlwind from the very predictable negative
outcomes of the decline in marriage and the breakdown of the
traditional family — nowhere more evident than on display on a
drive through Detroit or other major cities. It is a very sad day
for America when our president chooses to put his short-run,
short-lived benefit of getting re-elected ahead of the long-run
well-being of the nation’s priceless children who will bear the
brunt of his support for the unleashing of rapacious special
interest groups whose appetites for self-indulgence knows no
limits.