In the wake of the passage of Proposition 8 I've seen many diaries and blogs that have tried to put into perspective what it means exactly. I'v seen diaries that discuss the role of Black voters disproportionatly high support of prop 8 and the varying reasons for such support, diaries lashing out at various religious groups (LDS) whose members not only voted overwhelmingly for prop 8, but actually raised millions of dollars to ensure its passage.
Predictibly there has been lots of anger, hurt feelings, and frustration over Prop 8 (almost all of it justified IMO). Anger directed (rightly) at so called social conservatives who wholeheartedly endorse discrimination and bigotry being enshrined into law in constitution of every state in the union. The usual players are taking the brunt of this frustration (Huckabee, Robertson, Dobson et al)
What I find curious however, is that there is one man whose position on gay marriage is virtually identical to that of Mike Huckabee of all people. This man is openly opposed to same sex marriage, yet he's recieved very little criticism for his discriminatory stance (sorry, there's no other way to describe it) from the same people who rail against, and lament the same discriminatory stance taken by Mike Huckabee.
I'm speaking of course of President-elect Barack Obama.
WARNING!!! harsh (legitimate) criticisim of Barack Obama ahead, many of you probably won't like it but I'd urge that you engage my argument on its own merit. I would say (have said) exactly the same thing about any Republican who held the same views as Obama on gay marriage.
here's a telling exchange from June 16 interview with Obama conducted by Jake Tapper for ABC news http://abcnews.go.com/...
TAPPER: OK, last one, and that is same-sex marriage is now going on in California.
OBAMA: Right.
TAPPER: You oppose same-sex marriage.
OBAMA: Yes.
TAPPER: Do you think that the fact that this is now going on in California, does that cause you to re-think your pledge to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act?
OBAMA: No. I still think that these are decisions that need to be made at a state and local level. I'm a strong supporter of civil unions. And I think that, you know, we're involved in a national conversation about this issue.
You know, I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, but I also think that same-sex partners should be able to visit each other in hospitals, they should be able to transfer property, they should be able to get the same federal rights and benefits that are conferred onto married couples.
And so, you know, as president, my job is to make sure that the federal government is not discriminating and that we maintain the federal government's historic role in not meddling with what states are doing when it comes to marriage law. That's what I'll do as president.
TAPPER: Does it bother you, what California's doing?
OBAMA: No.
This is some pretty blatant revisionist history, espceially from a constitutional scholar.
First off, the federal government (in modern American history) has been very active in meddling with state laws (pertaining to marriage or anything else) that is deemed unconstitutional (Loving v. Virginia)
Secondly Mr. Obama, as President your job is to protect and defend the constitution of the United States. That means if a state is violating the constitution you have an obligation to take action. Thats what the Department of Justice is for.
But it doesn't end there. this quote from an MTV interview just days before he was elected is a textbook example of doublespeak http://blogs.abcnews.com/...
"I've stated my opposition to this. I think it's unnecessary," Obama told MTV. "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage. But when you start playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that's not what America's about."
"Usually, our constitutions expand liberties, they don't contract them," he added.
Once again, he admits his own personal bias of not being in favor of equal rights for people who happen to be homosexual (a civil union isn't marriage, seperate is not equal
Brown v Board). Yet in the very next sentence he seems to bemoans his own position as "not what America's about". Apparently in America de facto discrimination is ok, de jure discrimination not so much. It's like if I were to say "I oppose interracial marriage", then in the next breath say that "Laws banning interracial marriage are un American". shouldn't both statments be considered against the ideals of America?
Of course, Obama's stance on this issue has been widely known for months, yet there seems to be a real disconnect post Prop 8's passage, he hasn't seemed to address the issue at all, and while blanket charges of homophobia in the black community (and there is homophobia in the black community, trust me) tend to paint most Black folks as gay hating religious zealots. The most prominent Black man in America, a man who openly opposes same sex marriage, President elect Barack Obama, remains untouched by the criticism. Why is that?
The other night Jon Stewart grilled Christian fundamentalist Mike Huckabee over his nonsensical stance against gay marriage. I imagine most folks here cheered (like I did) as Huckabee squirmed like a rat in a maze, forced to defend indefensible positions, Huckabee's irrational bigotry was exposed for the world to see.
I wonder how Obama's seperate but equal logic would stand up under such pointed scrutiny, my guess is not very well.