What did President Obama say new tonight? Absolutely nothing. What did the Human Rights Campaign get in exchange for once again giving our president cover for all of his broken promises to our community? Absolutely nothing.Obama's not stupid, of course. Note this week's survey at Pew Research, "Most Still Oppose Gay Marriage, but Support for Civil Unions Continues to Rise." That's right. A majority still opposes same-sex marriage, but an even larger majority wants gay couples to have legal rights: In other words, don't change the traditional meaning of marriage to satisfy something that it was never intended to be. That is, two men or two women can never fulfill the biological, social, and institutional function of the union of man and woman, whether consecrated under secular or spiritual authority. And thus, President Obama's playing it straight, no pun intended:
Obama is justified in moving somewhat slowly on his campaign pledges to the gay community. As anxious as we are to see gay rights recognized throughout this country, it also is important for the administration to set priorities and make progress in a politically strategic way. It was inevitable, given the unrealistic postelection expectations of immediate and all-encompassing change, that Obama would disappoint some of his constituencies in the first year or two. Right now, the president is rightly focused on healthcare and the economy.I'll have more on this tomorrow, with my coverage of the communist-inspired National Equality March tomorrow.
Meanwhile, check "Obama Pledges Again to End 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' but Offers No Timetable" (via Memeorandum).
Oh, I almost forgot. See also, "HONESTLY, IS JOHN ARAVOSIS A PIECE OF EXCREMENT OR WHAT?"
ADDED: Common Sense Political Thought, "Now I can see why President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize: Promises and platitudes are far more important than action
2 comments:
the problem as i see it is that equal rights are not what the ultimate goal of gays is. it is the right to marry that is their goal. equal rights is just the excuse they are using to get the pity needed to gain support for their cause.
I'm shocked, shocked! that you failed to mention your good friend Pam Spaulding's response! :)
My take on it concerns "Don't Ask/Don't Tell/Don't Investigate," which I think is a ridiculous policy from a security standpoint: if a homosexual is allowed to serve as long as no one knows he is homosexual, but is to be discharged if it becomes known, a point of blackmailability is artificially created. That’s just dumb. From a security viewpoint, either homosexuals should be allowed to serve whether their sexual orientation is known or not, or homosexuals should not be allowed to serve, period. To have a wink and nod approach, but with a serious penalty involved if the wrong people find out, is madness.
Post a Comment