President Obama recently announced his personal support for homosexual marriage in an interview with Robin Roberts.
She asked, “So Mr. President, are you still opposed to same-sex marriage?”
The President responded, “Well-- you know, I have to tell you, as I've said, I've-- I've been going through an evolution on this issue. …” And he continued, “But I have to tell you that over the course of-- several years, as I talk to friends and family and neighbors. When I think about-- members of my own staff who are incredibly committed, in monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together. … At a certain point, I've just concluded that-- for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that-- I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.”
President Obama’s complete response:
Listening to President Obama’s explanation for his change of heart, I have to wonder why he held his previous view, “that marriage is the union between a man and a woman.” Was it because he didn’t know or like anyone who was in a same-sex relationship? And, if so, did the President require a positive, personal relationship with others who held a different point of view in order for him to consider the validity of their opinion?
It seems to me that his evolution was based on the likeability of his new friends and neighbors, rather than on the legality or morality of the issue.
Also, it is interesting to see the words the President chose to describe homosexual members of his staff, “incredibly committed, in monogamous relationships”. Historically, marriage has been between a man and a woman committed to a monogamous relationship. Why choose to discard one main aspect of marriage (a man and a woman) and hold to the other (monogamous relationship)? What is his criteria for tossing the first and keeping the last? What assurance do we have that the President’s view on monogamy will not evolve? Maybe he has yet to watch, “Sister Wives”.
“For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.” (Bible, New Testament, Romans 1: 26&27)
In order for President Obama, who claims to be a Christian, to affirm same sex marriage he had to “filter” clear Christian teaching through his personal emotions. This is acknowledged by the words of President Obama’s spiritual advisor, Dr. Joel Hunter, “The president sometimes thinks with his heart. He really has a great compassion for people, especially those who are left out. And so as he interprets scripture, he interprets it through that filter."
More on Dr. Joel Hunter’s discussion with President Obama:
If it is simply a legal, civil liberty issue, why did the President feel the need to discuss it with a Christian Pastor?
More importantly, why have the discussion after the President had already made up his mind? (Dr. Hunter: “He wanted to tell me his reasoning and how he arrived at this conclusion.”) Would not an honest thought process have considered both sides of the issue, consulting with advisors on both positions, before making the final decision?
Columnist Tommy Christopher wrote that, “The President’s arc on gay marriage, in my view, has always been a series of noble lies. … Obama told the noble lie that he believed marriage was between a man and a woman so that he could move closer to a time when it wouldn’t matter what he, or anyone else, believed about someone else’s marriage. … Instead, the firestorm surrounding Joe Biden and Arne Duncan has resulted in the worst of both worlds: an evolution that took to long, and now appears to have been completed only under tremendous pressure. It’s still a good day for the President, and for marriage equality, but not the win it could have been. The President, a famous conservative poker player, held his aces too long in this case.”
Tommy Christopher’s complete article:
Was the President sincere in 2008 when he said he believed that marriage is the union between a man and a woman? We cannot see into the President’s heart. However, if we simply look at what the President said as to how his position on marriage evolved, one might question President Obama’s ability, at least on this issue, to put aside his own personal emotions to make a sound, rational decision.