“…The U.S. Constitution…forbids all forms of discrimination. Obama showed how clearly he understood that in his inaugural address, when he said: “The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.”
It is impossible to adhere to those principles while also proposing that some citizens should have fewer rights than others for no better reason than the majority disapproves of their sexual preference. Obama claims not to support such discrimination, but his views on the issue are an embarrassing muddle; he opposed Proposition 8, California’s same-sex marriage ban, yet says unequivocally that he believes “marriage” is strictly between one man and one woman.
Obama is caught up in semantics, apparently believing that gays and lesbians should be allowed to engage in civil unions with all the rights of marriage, as long as they aren’t called marriages. That’s an evasion that was rightly rejected in May by the California Supreme Court when it overturned a previous ban on same-sex marriage, because such semantic distinctions tend to cast doubt on a union’s legitimacy.
At the time of Obama’s birth in 1961, some states would not have allowed his interracial parents to marry. He, of all people, should know better.”– The editorial board of the Los Angeles Times, writing today in a piece titled, “Now, About Gay Marriage