Obama got it right about gay marriage . . . in 2004
What I believe is that marriage is between a man and a woman. But what I also believe is that we have an obligation to make sure that gays and lesbians have the rights of citizenship that afford them visitations to hospitals, that allow them to transfer property between partners, to make certain that they’re not discriminated against on the job.
OK, confession time: I didn’t create those opening sentences. Then-U.S. Senate candidate Barack Obama did, in 2004.
Obama offered a different, “evolved” belief Wednesday, saying he thinks same-sex couples should be able to marry. He had it right the first time.
Well, not the first first time. Before tackling the issue, let’s review Obama’s “evolution.” In 1996, while running for the Illinois Senate, Obama noted on a questionnaire that he “favor[ed] legalizing same-sex marriages.” By 2004, he’d flipped on that position.
Last week — after an endorsement of gay marriage by Vice President Joe Biden and a report that wealthy gay donors had threatened to stop giving to his campaign, but before high-profile fundraisers with gay-rights supporters — Obama flopped.
He attributed his change of heart to experiences with gay friends and staffers; unnamed aides told the New York Times the president’s “brand” couldn’t withstand any more “hedging” on the issue.
But Obama did not propose a policy change, and he insisted he won’t campaign on the issue. Rather, he endorsed letting each state decide. That would be a tenable position had his administration not stopped defending against legal challenges to the law, the Clinton-era Defense of Marriage Act, that enables states to do just that.
This is not Obama the principled, but the cynical. And that’s a shame. Obama’s 2004 stance might pass bipartisan muster.
You’ve heard religious arguments against gay marriage. I won’t repeat them. Here’s a secular argument.
In the same 2004 interview, Obama said “we have a set of traditions” for marriage that “need to be preserved.” These social traditions have been recognized widely, for centuries, as the building blocks of a self-perpetuating civilization. It is not for government to change a social tradition any more than to ban social traditions that are harmless.
Nor should government change broadly accepted definitions of words, which is what proponents of same-sex “marriage” want. This time it’s the meaning of “marriage”; when auto makers were bailed out, it was “bondholder.”
If government legally redefines marriage now, on what grounds will social entities defend the right to their own definition? Obama’s personal pledge to protect religious liberty regarding marriage won’t hold up in court. It’s cold comfort anyway, given his attempt earlier this year to violate Catholics’ freedom of conscience concerning contraception.
At the same time, legal rights created by government, such as those governing hospital visitation, probably shouldn’t be subject to social tradition. Gay couples’ inability to fulfill the traditional definition of “marriage” should not render them unequal under the law.
Opinion polls depict gay marriage as more popular than actual referendums find: The cause is 1-for-35 in state votes, and the one win (in Arizona) was later overturned in a subsequent referendum. This may reflect a popular preference for granting gay couples equal legal rights while upholding marriage’s traditional definition, perhaps through a civil union.
The Obama of 2004 would have worked toward that goal. Too bad this vintage won’t.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
305 comments Add your comment
Ayn Rant
May 11th, 2012
6:34 pm
President Obama “evolved”; maybe you should too, Kyle! Just read the US Constitution for political guidance, and the Holy Bible for moral guidance. But read them cover to cover, to gain knowledge, rather than to seek out-of-context snippets to justify your prejudices.
The US Constitution does not grant government the power to regulate marriage; marriage is a protected liberty under the opening paragraph and the Bill of Rights.
Christ, when refuting the Old Testament procedure for divorce, used marriage between a man and a woman as an example. He did not note or criticize other forms of marriage. He did state clearly the Two Commandments of the Christian religion; oppressing people who disagree with you, but cause you no harm, is a flagrant violation of the religion taught by Christ.
So, tell me again why, because you believe that marriage should be a union of a man and a woman, you want to deny others the political and moral right to pursue the form of marriage that is appropriate for them!
Bryan G.
May 11th, 2012
6:35 pm
You know what would be great? If Obama came out in favor of balancing the budget and paying off debt next week.
Gizat
May 11th, 2012
6:36 pm
President Obama really you has stubid idea about gay marriage. Same sex marriage is shame illegal every religiously, morally …etc. I’m sorry about your comment!!
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
May 11th, 2012
6:39 pm
Balancing budgets is hard work, Bryan, and spending money is so much more fun.
Obozo: Lazy.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
May 11th, 2012
6:41 pm
So, tell me again why, because you believe that marriage should be a union of a man and a woman
————————
Haven’t the Democrats destroyed enough of the institutions that kept America strong? Public schools, health care, the work ethic, two-parent families, free enterprise capitalism, personal responsibility…
Thanks, Democrats.
Stephenson Billings
May 11th, 2012
6:53 pm
Too bad Obama won’t tout states’ rights with something like, say, abortion….
MarkV
May 11th, 2012
6:58 pm
Kyle article is a travesty of political double standard. Obama as President several times talked about his opinion in this matter evolving. To call it now a flop is deplorable. It is ridiculous to argue that it is in conflict with not defending DOMA. Naturally, Kyle carefully avoids Romney’s flip-flopping on this issue.
But the most ridiculous claim Kyle makes is that “it is not for government to change a social tradition.” Governments change social traditions all the time when those traditions come into conflict with the evolution of the society. Slavery, religious laws, submission of women to men, child labor were at one time also social traditions.
Sunday Umoren
May 11th, 2012
6:59 pm
What GOD did to d gays of time of Lot, HE wil definitely to d gays of our time, including those that give approval: abomination which is sin + curse!, is dangerous to a generation.
Sunday Umoren
May 11th, 2012
7:03 pm
Enter your comments here
Stephenson Billings
May 11th, 2012
7:03 pm
I like that term. Politicians now don’t “flip-flop”, they “evolve” :rolleyes:
Stephenson Billings
May 11th, 2012
7:04 pm
I wonder what other terms for flip-flopping were presented in their focus group testing before settling on “evolved”
Stephenson Billings
May 11th, 2012
7:10 pm
“about one in six of Obama’s top campaign ‘bundlers’ are gay . . . making it difficult for the president to defer the matter.”
That will make a politician “evolve”.
“You have to love both the cynicism and the self-contradiction of carefully calibrating a major change in position in order to serve the purpose of making the other guy look like a flip-flopper.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304203604577396221780005972.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Stephenson Billings
May 11th, 2012
7:12 pm
Or maybe Obama finally realized his one true love: himself
Class of '98
May 11th, 2012
7:13 pm
Do people in favor of gay marriage also favor polygamy? If not, why not? Are the people involved in polygamous relationships not also loving, consenting adults?
Martin Williams
May 11th, 2012
7:19 pm
You sound very silly just like the Tea Party fools. If you want Obama to balance the budget and pay all U.S debts, then we need to stop being the WORLD police and stop lying to go to unnecessary wars like George W Bush did and for goodness sake give tax break at the same time. To all you fake believers, nothing in the Bible/or Koran that stated marriage means one man/one woman. Some folks in the Bible were even marrying their own daughters and some having more than one woman and this is going on right under our feet in this country today. I believe ALL religious institutions in this country should start paying there share of taxes to help America get out of debt and have a balance budget and at the same time, the same institutions will start talking about more relevant social issues besides abortions, same sex marriage, ETC. We DO NOT even have health care for every American and we call ourselves the richest and most advanced nation in the world. It sounds like a myth to me. Kyle, tell the government to stay out of my social life, especially the evagelicans. Look what Catholics priests have done to many many lives.
Class of '98
May 11th, 2012
7:24 pm
Martin, educate yourself. Bush did not decide to go to war with Iraq, the United States congress did. In fact, a majority of Senate Democrats voted in favor of it, based on the intelligence at the time… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution
Educate yourself, and you’ll become a conservative eventually.
MarkV
May 11th, 2012
7:38 pm
Class of ‘98 @7:24 pm. “Bush did not decide to go to war with Iraq, the United States congress did.”
Wrong, or more precisely, a lie.
Don Abernethy
May 11th, 2012
7:55 pm
Nice try.As a born again christian (hope you are too) the Bible teaches us to love the gays but hate their sin. No matter what the gays and supporter of gays say or do NOTHING can change what God has decided on this issue.God says in His word that anyone who does not repent of a homosexual life style is going to Hell. Period.
bluecoat
May 11th, 2012
7:57 pm
Which war?Pappa’s or Babies?
Joe the Prophet
May 11th, 2012
8:02 pm
Don Abernethy
May 11th, 2012
7:55 pm
Nice try.As a born again christian (hope you are too) the Bible teaches us to love the gays but hate their sin. No matter what the gays and supporter of gays say or do NOTHING can change what God has decided on this issue.God says in His word that anyone who does not repent of a homosexual life style is going to Hell. Period.
——————————————
You know that is exactly right, Don Abernethy.
Know what it also says..? That Jesus is the sole mediator between man and God.
Unfortunately, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints do not believe this. Also, in Matthew, the Bible also condemns false prophets and polytheists to Hell, as it does hypocrites in the book of Job…the same Hell as the homosexual…
Fortunately for Mormons, however, they do not believe in Hell….but unfortunately, the Christian hypocrites do….!!!!! Good luck with your Presidential election in November..!!!!
bluecoat
May 11th, 2012
8:08 pm
Yeah,and look what he done to Lots wife.Not to mention what his daughters done to him.
hryder
May 11th, 2012
8:10 pm
Okay, gay used to mean carefree happiness, now it usually denotes something to do with homosexuality. The vast majority of people accept marriage as unions between one male and one female in the USA unless dissolved legally or by the death of one of the two. Call it a civil union or whatever, if between female-female or male-male, with all legal and contractual possibilities. Do not call it marriage and allow that term to be high jacked. Allow anyone with reasonable intelligence to define terms and that person can, by definition, always be correct. Consider that by his definition Bill Clinton was NOT sexually involved with Monica Lewinsky, almost all agree that is hogwash.
Joe the Prophet
May 11th, 2012
8:32 pm
Bryan G.
May 11th, 2012
6:35 pm
You know what would be great? If Obama came out in favor of balancing the budget and paying off debt next week
——————————————-
He has come out in favor of such…..Just can’t seem to get rid of those dern tax cuts for oil companies and millionares….Suit ye-self…!!!!
Just saying..
May 11th, 2012
8:33 pm
Forward contrasts with Backwards.
Grob Hahn
May 11th, 2012
8:35 pm
The Meebo bar is VERY annoying. I don’t care if gay people get married. The government has no business regulating marriage at all. Meebo sucks.
Grobbbbbbbbb
JKL2
May 11th, 2012
8:36 pm
How many times can you change your opinion on a position before a Democrat can be called a “flip flopper”?
Skip
May 11th, 2012
8:44 pm
Chum the water, unbelievable that someone would get paid to do this. What a waste of a life.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
May 11th, 2012
8:51 pm
Romney is a freaking amateur when it comes to flip flopping.
Nobody does it better than obozo, mmm, mmmm, mmmmm!
jms
May 11th, 2012
9:05 pm
“So, tell me again why, because you believe that marriage should be a union of a man and a woman, you want to deny others the political and moral right to pursue the form of marriage that is appropriate for them!”
The institution of marriage as defined by one man/one woman has been around for centuries. Society settled upon that. As such, it’s not up to its supporters to defend it from your reinterpretation. The burden is upon you to convince us why it should be otherwise.
So far your feet stamping tantrums are not compelling.
It's A Bran Nue Dae Republicans
May 11th, 2012
9:05 pm
@Lil’ Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
May 11th, 2012
6:41 pm
Haven’t the Democrats destroyed enough of the institutions that kept America strong? Public schools, health care, the work ethic, two-parent families, free enterprise capitalism, personal responsibility…
Thanks, Democrats.
*************************************************************
IF “YOU” are a MODEL of what is “RIGHT” with this country………..
“WE” are in SERIOUS TROUBLE.
“YOU” ain’t no SHINING ROLE MODEL YOURSELF.
Del
May 11th, 2012
9:11 pm
The inconvenient truth for the left is that the majority of Americans do not favor same sex marriage. The majority of Americans do not want their children indoctrinated with the notion that homosexuality is normal. Obama is stepping into deep do do trying to play to his hard-left base for a few dollars more. It’s going to backfire.
It's A Bran Nue Dae Republicans
May 11th, 2012
9:13 pm
@I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin…
May 11th, 2012
8:51 pm
Romney is a freaking amateur when it comes to flip flopping.
Nobody does it better than obozo, mmm, mmmm, mmmmm!
***************************************************************
And MITT WITT scissorhands AIN’T A GOOD LIAR either.
heeheehehheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheehee
It's A Bran Nue Dae Republicans
May 11th, 2012
9:15 pm
@Del
May 11th, 2012
9:11 pm
The inconvenient truth for the left is that the majority of Americans do not favor same sex marriage. The majority of Americans do not want their children indoctrinated with the notion that homosexuality is normal. Obama is stepping into deep do do trying to play to his hard-left base for a few dollars more. It’s going to backfire.
*****************************************************************
This is not about homosexuality…….its about “CIVIL RIGHTS”.
Del
May 11th, 2012
9:23 pm
“This is not about homosexuality…….its about “CIVIL RIGHTS”.
Homosexuals already have civil rights. This is a about making homosexuality an acceptable sexual behavior. You may have fooled yourself or you’re trying to fool the majority who aren’t to be fooled. Look at all of the states that have voted against it including the liberal state of California. Most recently North Carolina where the dumocrats will be holding their convention.
It's A Bran Nue Dae Republicans
May 11th, 2012
9:25 pm
@Don Abernethy
May 11th, 2012
7:55 pm
Nice try.As a born again christian (hope you are too) the Bible teaches us to love the gays but hate their sin. No matter what the gays and supporter of gays say or do NOTHING can change what God has decided on this issue.God says in His word that anyone who does not repent of a homosexual life style is going to Hell. Period.
********************************************************************************
“IF” what you say is true………….
Gays WILL HAVE A LOT OF COMPANY IN HELL.
Paul Ryan, John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Michelle Bachman,
Newt Gingrich, Calista Gingrich, George Zimmerman, Hitler, the KKK, Bin Laden,
Warren Jeffs, Jack the Ripper, Lil Barry Bailout, I Report, Tiberius………….:)
Jack McFarland
May 11th, 2012
9:25 pm
“At the same time, legal rights created by government, such as those governing hospital visitation, probably shouldn’t be subject to social tradition…”
Probably?! Really, Kyle? Smdh. What a waste of space this article is.
It's A Bran Nue Dae Republicans
May 11th, 2012
9:29 pm
@Del
May 11th, 2012
9:23 pm
“This is not about homosexuality…….its about “CIVIL RIGHTS”.
Homosexuals already have civil rights. This is a about making homosexuality an acceptable sexual behavior. You may have fooled yourself or you’re trying to fool the majority who aren’t to be fooled. Look at all of the states that have voted against it including the liberal state of California. Most recently North Carolina where the dumocrats will be holding their convention.
********************************************************
“Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.
Luke 6:37
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
May 11th, 2012
9:31 pm
@Del
May 11th, 2012
9:23 pm
Get the PLANK out of your own eye……………
Luke 6:41
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? Luke 6:41
May 11th, 2012
9:35 pm
@Don Abernethy
May 11th, 2012
7:55 pm
Nice try.As a born again christian (hope you are too) the Bible teaches us to love the gays but hate their sin. No matter what the gays and supporter of gays say or do NOTHING can change what God has decided on this issue.God says in His word that anyone who does not repent of a homosexual life style is going to Hell. Period.
**************************************************
When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone.”
John 8:7
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? Luke 6:41
May 11th, 2012
9:40 pm
@Stephenson Billings
May 11th, 2012
7:04 pm
I wonder what other terms for flip-flopping were presented in their focus group testing before settling on “evolved”
*******************************************************************
Flip-Flopping was ALREADY BEING USED for MITT WITT.
He has the copyrights.
Ray
May 11th, 2012
9:40 pm
Views in this country are obviously evolving on equality/ same- sex marriage rights. Just like interracial marriages, it is only a matter of time before same-sex marriages will be declared a civil right. 70% of those under 30 are already in favor of it. And, 50% of the general population does today. It will very likely be a single Supreme Court judicial decision that finally sets out the ability to marry, for all, is a civil right.
Mary Elizabeth
May 11th, 2012
9:52 pm
In 1996, President Obama said that he favored same-sex marriage on a questionnaire. In 2004, he said that he was in favor of Civil Unions. Now he has publicly stated that he favors same-sex marriage. It is easy for me to reconcile these seeming differences, without thinking that President Obama has changed his opinions over time in a “flip-flop.” Earlier, I had written on this blog, in another thread, that I believe Obama’s vision is – and has been – more expansive than Gov. Romney’s vision, which I think is – and has been – more limited in perspective than President Obama’s.
I believe that President Obama has probably believed in same-sex marriage, as an equal right for all, even before 1996. I have stated that I believe that the world’s collective consciousness has been moving in a more egalitarian direction for the last few centuries. I believe that President Obama not only sees this himself, but I believe he believes that the world will be better for having moved in that direction. If one believes in the concept of egalitarianism, then one would support same-sex marriage for those born with that sexual orientation.
Then, why in 2004 did Obama say that he believed in Civil Unions? I think that he is aware that the world evolves, just as Thomas Jefferson was aware that the world evolves, continuously. Jefferson was not a strong proponent for immediately freeing the slaves because he felt that the slaves, and that society at large were not prepared for, nor ready for, a quick change from slave to free, but Jefferson spoke of the right of slaves to be free and that, in time – perhaps in 50 years from the time in which he spoke those words in the early 1800s – society would be prepared for that greater good of freedom for all, including slaves. Those were Jefferson’s perceptions. Likewise, I believe that Obama has believed in same sex marriage for some time, but I also believe that he could not speak out publicly as a proponent for same sex marriage for those of that orientation too far ahead of the evolution of society to see with his eyes that same sex marriage is inherently right, in terms of equality for all. To have spoken of those evolved perceptions too soon would have been political suicide for him because his vision would have been too far in advance of the vision of the American people regarding marriage. Can we really call that a cynical decision on his part to be more measured in 2004 regarding his publicly stated views on marriage, or was he simply being politically astute and even politically wise? I think the answer is the latter. However, the point is that, now, society has evolved to the point that a President of the United States can speak out for same-sex marriage without risking his entire political future, and Obama did speak out, even with some risk still remaining at present.
I have no idea if President Obama shares my views on same-sex marriage, but I will post my views, below, which I first posted on Jay Bookman’s blog on May 10, 2012:
========================================================
“ ‘It’s a sad day in America. Like it or not, the country was founded on Christian values. Gay’s and lot’s of people don’t see this as a problem because they have God no where in their life. . .’
—————————————————————————
The comment, above, is reflective of so many others that I read on this blog (Jay Bookman’s blog) last evening. And it reflects the general lack of consciousness that was, also, prevalent when segregation of the races was debated when I was a teenager in Georgia. So much fear of changing perceptions. So much small-mindedness. So much use of the Bible and God to divide people. People, today, cannot imagine how much the Bible and God were used to defend a separation of the races in the 1950s. I did not think, then, that God cared about skin color, any more than I think God cares about sexual orientation today. Only the small-minded divide by such silliness in their thinking. And, that is exactly what caring about sexual plumbing is. We are our insides and our spirits, not such shallowness as whether we possess a v-gina or a p-nis.
Although the world is developing a more egalitarian consciousness, many individuals have a long way to go in reaching a higher consciousness. Besides that, Americans remain Puritanical about sex, and that is part of the reason for our deep-seated fears and hostililties toward differences in others. I write this as a heterosexual woman who was faithful to both of my husbands. As I had written to josef on my own blog, I do not think of “who I am” in terms of any label – woman, Southerner, Liberal, Caucasian, Christian, American. There is a core spirit in me – as well as in you –that is God-given, and that core spirit is beyond any assigned, dogmatic label, which we – with limited spiritual insight – feel we must give to ourselves and to others. Can we not, at least, attempt to grow in consciousness – and not be afraid to even use word ‘consciousness’ for fear we will be perceived as ‘different’ by doing so.
For my perceptions on how we are Puritanical in sexual matters, as well as how we are obsessed with the work ethic because of our Puritanical roots, please read this in-depth post on my own blog, which I wrote last August:
http://maryelizabethsings.wordpress.com/2011/08/17/puritanism-sexuality-and-the-work-ethic/ ”
————————————————————————————————-
Mary Elizabeth
May 11th, 2012
9:54 pm
For anyone who may be interested, here is a post from my blog in which I describe how the world is evolving toward a more egalitarian consciousness. See link below:
http://maryelizabethsings.wordpress.com/2010/12/26/a-new-year-a-budding-world-consciousness/
Tom(Independent-Viet Vet)
May 11th, 2012
9:57 pm
Class of 98@7:24 – You are exactly correct sir but the libs just will not accept it, even if it is written in black and white!!
Old Timer
May 11th, 2012
10:08 pm
It doesn’t matter who marriies who if th economy is in the tank. Our President should admit he has been a failure and is now trying to confuse the issue with a multitude of issues. Unbelievable.
Oblama
May 11th, 2012
10:11 pm
Next on the Oblama agenda as ordered by another of his special interest donors PETA: spousal rights for human/ pet marriages. It’s coming soon to your neighborhood and Oblama’s opinion is “evolving”.
Oblama
May 11th, 2012
10:13 pm
This election is about the economy, jobs and how to reduce this alarming multi trillion dollar Fed debt. All the rest is smoke and mirrors. Soon we will be singing to Oblama – turn out the light YOUR parties over.
Get Real
May 11th, 2012
10:24 pm
Liberals are just too funny!!
Obamination
May 11th, 2012
10:26 pm
To know that 50% of our countries are to stupid to realize this president is the biggest liar since Satan is to me unthinkable. But then again only 50% have common sense and it’s NOT the zeolots supporting this muslim!!!
Obamination
May 11th, 2012
10:28 pm
And I often wonder if Obama has someone hiding in the closet, he sure does lisp (not that that’s a bad think now – Don’t want a bunch of cross dressers hiding behind my bushes) a lot when he speaks. Just saying.