Obama for Gay Marriage…no really…just not now
The Windy City Times has finally published the article which has already made its way around the entire Internet.
In 1996, President-Elect Barack Obama filled out a questionnaire for the then Outlines newspaper (since merged with Windy City). In a signed document, he announced he supported same-sex marriage.
Even better, in 2004 Obama conducted an interview with the Windy City Times while preparing for his successful run for Senate. In it, Obama explicitly described his new vigor for civil-unions instead of same-sex marriage as a purely strategic decision.
“WCT: Do you have a position on marriage vs. civil unions?
Obama: I am a fierce supporter of domestic-partnership and civil-union laws. I am not a supporter of gay marriage as it has been thrown about, primarily just as a strategic issue. I think that marriage, in the minds of a lot of voters, has a religious connotation. I know that’s true in the African-American community, for example. And if you asked people, ‘should gay and lesbian people have the same rights to transfer property, and visit hospitals, and et cetera,’ they would say, ‘absolutely.’ And then if you talk about, ‘should they get married?’, then suddenly …
WCT: There are more than 1,000 federal benefits that come with marriage. Looking back in the 1960s and inter-racial marriage, the polls showed people against that as well.
Obama: Since I’m a product of an interracial marriage, I’m very keenly aware of …
WCT: But you think, strategically, gay marriage isn’t going to happen so you won’t support it at this time?
Obama: What I’m saying is that strategically, I think we can get civil unions passed. I think we can get SB 101 passed. I think that to the extent that we can get the rights, I’m less concerned about the name. And I think that is my No. 1 priority, is an environment in which the Republicans are going to use a particular language that has all sorts of connotations in the broader culture as a wedge issue, to prevent us moving forward, in securing those rights, then I don’t want to play their game.
WCT: If Massachusetts gets marriage and this gives momentum to the proposed federal Constitutional amendment against gay marriage?
Obama: I would oppose that.”
Now, I’ve been reading all the enraged commentary from the standard gay advocates. Unfortunately I have yet to see someone take this side of the issue.
Of course he’s not for Gay Marriage. As much as this issue is a complete no-brainer, unfortunately I’d be willing to say that at least 50% of this country is still heavily homophobic. And I’m not talking anti-homophobic homophobes who work hard to address their bigotry. I’m talking about complete assholes who would be willing to vote against their own self interest (aka a McCain/Palin ticket) just to ensure gays don’t have the option to eat cake and register at Ikea (or Gucci or uHaul.com…take your pick).
What these admissions really tell us is that on a reasoned, competely rational level, Obama really does support Gay Marriage. If he was the president of a vaccuum, we’d be getting married January 21st. But unfortunately, he’s not.
He’s repeatedly told the gays he’s for civil unions, and civil unions that represent all of the current rights of marriage. He is against bans on gay marriage. (Which again, logically, means he is FOR gay marriage.) But unfortunately, on the main stage of American politics, he’s got to hide behind civil unions and “States Rights”.
Is this disappointing? Yes. Incredibly. Would it be great if he showed some balls and just up and pushed Gay Marriage into law? Yes. Is that the country we’re all paying taxes into? No.
What do I think? I think we’ll see marked improvements over the next four years. Some of these achievements will be on the gay rights front. Perhaps a repeal of DOMA, of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, perhaps the Obama’s will adopt a gay dog. If you ask me, a labradoodle sounds pretty homo to me.
On other fronts, I think we’ll see improvements that affect all of us, breeder or no. If (I mean when..please please please) we accomplish some level of Universal Health Care, the right to have your significant other covered under your employer-based health coverage is null. That’s the perk that has me salivating for a white wedding.
Looking into the future, I’m even starting to think about what could be accomplished in a second term. Once he’s in year 5, he’s got no re-election to worry about, so he could honestly just push his agenda. And call me naive, but I actually trust this man. Start reserving the chapels, parks, and bathhouses for your 2013 wedding.