About This Blog
Here is a video of two gay Tea Party members being interviewed at a Tea Party event. They have some interesting views on gay marriage. They also discuss the bigotry they face. Guess where that bigotry comes from ? (Hint - it doesn't come from other Tea Partiers).
The central idea being put forward is that it's none of the government's business what kind of relationships consenting adults enter into. I certainly agree with that. Who I decide to live with, love, marry, or have sex with is none of the government's business at all. I don't require a government stamp of approval to enter into a voluntary relationship with another person. The government exists to secure the constitutional rights of the citizenry, not to decide who gets them and who doesn't. I'm against discriminatory policies of all types, thus I support gay marriage.
Why IS the government involved in the marriage business ? From a legal standpoint, which is the only aspect that concerns the government, marriage is a contract. We shouldn't be going to the polls to vote upon whether two people can enter into a legal contract or not, as we've been doing. We don't go to the polls to enter into a legal contract, we go to a lawyer to draw the contract up, or we draw it up ourselves. As far as the government is concerned, ALL marriages should be considered nothing more than civil unions (legal contracts). The government should provide no additional benefits or penalties to these unions, regardless of who enters into them, because it's none of the government's business.
If this was the extent of the government's involvement in marriage, we wouldn't have President Obama's Senior Advisor David Axelrod making ludicrous and contradictory statements in an attempt to explain the President's "position" on gay marriage. Axelrod said, "The president does oppose same-sex marriage, but he supports equality for gay and lesbian couples..."
Riiiight. And does the President also support equality for black people, as long as they ride in the back of the bus and eat at separate lunch counters ? I actually feel sorry for Axelrod for having to make this absurd argument to cover for Obama. If you really want to read something nonsensical, read this collection of Obama quotes about gay marriage over the last few years. Here's enough to expose the circular logic of our President:
RADIO INTERVIEW (WHILE RUNNING FOR SENATE) -2004:
"I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."
"AUDACITY OF HOPE" BOOK EXCERPT, BY BARACK OBAMA- October 17, 2006:
"[N]o matter how much Christians who oppose homosexuality may claim that they hate the sin but love the sinner, such a judgment inflicts pain on good people."
SENATE VOTE - July 18, 2006:
Obama votes against a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage because the decision should be left to states.
CAMPAIGN STATEMENT - Tuesday June 17, 2008:
"Barack Obama has always believed that same-sex couples should enjoy equal rights under the law, and he will continue to fight for civil unions as president. He respects the decision of the California Supreme Court, and continues to believe that states should make their own decisions when it comes to the issue of marriage."
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL - August 4, 2010:
"The president has spoken out in opposition to Proposition 8 because it is divisive and discriminatory. He will continue to promote equality for LGBT Americans."
Allow me to summarize - Obama's Christian religion makes him oppose gay marriage, even though he says Christians are hurting good people by doing so. Obama says the gay marriage issue should be left up to the states, but then when a state votes against gay marriage, Obama calls it divisive and discriminatory. Obama is for equality for gays, but not gay marriage.
That's some world-class hogwash right there. The President has twisted himself into rhetorical knots. I actually have a lot more respect for people who just say NO, a marriage should be between a man and a woman, period. I disagree from a legal aspect, but at least they are being straightforward, saying what they think. Obama is a political chameleon on the issue, spinning as hard as he can. In other words, we're getting typical Obama.