Thank you, Mr. President.

[citymama]

For speaking your mind and going with your conscience even in an election year and dealing with a hot potato issue. http://nyti.ms/IUGMWf

Love is love and I hope it will triumph over hate and bigotry.

Even if you disagree or are on the fence about same sex marriage, you will agree that it is refreshing to see a politician standing up for what he believes, at the risk of damaging his electability, rather than saying what the pollsters and speechwriters and PR hacks want him to say. Its been painful to watch McCain and Romney - and even Obama - hem and haw and hedge and flip flop on issues they once fought for because it would make them unpopular with some extreme sliver of the electorate. Put that aside, gentlemen, and do and say what your principles and conscience dictate.

In any event, a good day for civil rights. Thank you, Mr. President.

[hoodlims]

Agree. Too many politicians waffle and waver and at the end, are only a shell of what they used to be. I am also about staying out of other people's business if nobody is at harm.

[larig]

I gave him a big fat donation for this, in honor of my friends who deserve the same rights DH and I have.

[citymama]

I gave him a big fat donation for this, in honor of my friends who deserve the same rights DH and I have.

I'm about to do the same!

[larig]

I'm about to do the same!

I bet he has his biggest fundraising day this year because of this.

[citymama]

I bet he has his biggest fundraising day this year because of this.

Yeah, but you know that the conservatives - who are already cheering at this gift handed to them - will do so as well.

Am I the only one who went within a few hours from being thrilled by his announcement to fearful for his physical safety? May the forces of good protect our President and keep the wackos with weapons far, far away. And don't you go stirring up hatred, talk show hosts and political machinery.

[wellyes]

From what I understand, it was Joe Biden's completely unexpected words on Sunday talk shows that sorta forced the issue for the President. I wonder if this will be Biden's public legacy?

[ChunkyNicksChunkyMom]

I am about as conservative as they come, yet I am very sad about NC. People are people, period. I also am cynical about anything that comes out of any politicians mouth, Dem or Rep, and growing more so each year :(

[hillview]

For speaking your mind and going with your conscience even in an election year and dealing with a hot potato issue. http://nyti.ms/IUGMWf

Love is love and I hope it will triumph over hate and bigotry.

Even if you disagree or are on the fence about same sex marriage, you will agree that it is refreshing to see a politician standing up for what he believes, at the risk of damaging his electability, rather than saying what the pollsters and speechwriters and PR hacks want him to say. Its been painful to watch McCain and Romney - and even Obama - hem and haw and hedge and flip flop on issues they once fought for because it would make them unpopular with some extreme sliver of the electorate. Put that aside, gentlemen, and do and say what your principles and conscience dictate.

In any event, a good day for civil rights. Thank you, Mr. President.
:yeahthat:
well put

[mommylamb]

I am about as conservative as they come, yet I am very sad about NC. People are people, period.

It's always important and good to hear people who are conservative in other areas say things like this. I know a lot of conservatives who support gay marriage, and I appreciate them for that.

I know there are cynics out there who will point out that he said he "personally" supports it, because that does not require specific policy action, and there are those who will point out the donations made to Obama by the GLBT community, but I honestly believe that he does support gay marriage and that it's not a political ploy aimed at that part of his constituency. I do think he tried his best to understand the position of those who oppose gay marriage. Tried to put himself in their shoes to see if there was any legitimacy to their position. And that he found none after lengthy consideration.

[SnuggleBuggles]

Needs a "like" button!

[hellokitty]

Needs a "like" button!

:yeahthat:

[trcy]

...it is refreshing to see a politician standing up for what he believes, at the risk of damaging his electability, rather than saying what the pollsters and speechwriters and PR hacks want him to say. I was just saying the same think to DH last night.

[Green_Tea]

Even if you disagree or are on the fence about same sex marriage, you will agree that it is refreshing to see a politician standing up for what he believes, at the risk of damaging his electability, rather than saying what the pollsters and speechwriters and PR hacks want him to say.

This is exactly how I explained it to my kids yesterday! My DDs wanted to know why it is so exciting (because we live in a state where same sex marriage is legal, and they have friends with two moms/dads - so they think it's no big deal.) I explained that there are lots of people who think it's wrong for two people who love each other to get married if they both happen to be boys/girls, and that maybe those people won't vote for President Obama in the next election because of what he believes. I went on to use it as an example of standing up for what you know is right, even if lots of people might disagree and not like you because if it. My 9 year old mulled it over for a few moments and then said, "Our President is brave."

So proud of our President - and of my kids :heartbeat:.

[Gracemom]

I was so happy to hear him say that. Finally! I think gay marriage is the civil rights issue for our time, and we need our leaders to take a stand to give people more rights instead of taking them away. I'm a religious person, but I've never understood why same sex couples couldn't have a legal marriage and leave it up to each religion to decide if they could have a religious marriage as well.

[karstmama]

yay yay yay! i gave him some $, too.

[AngB]

Honestly, I think it was a smart move politically. The people who vote and are against gay marriage enough to vote for the amendment, etc. most likely weren't going to vote for Obama anyway.

I think there were a lot of people who weren't going to vote for Romney no matter what, but weren't all that excited about going out and voting for Obama again, who might not have voted at all, considering the last 4 years haven't been spectacular for a lot of people. I think they are hoping it will energize the people who voted for him the first time, to get out and vote again. I have been hearing even Republicans say on other message boards that they will probably vote for Obama now.

I suspect this will help him more than hurt him.

Politics aside, I am glad he did it.

[Giantbear]

took him too damn long to make this statement. My thoughts when i read it were, 'what took you so long'. It is a shame he had to be backed into this by his VP

[TwinFoxes]

From what I understand, it was Joe Biden's completely unexpected words on Sunday talk shows that sorta forced the issue for the President. I wonder if this will be Biden's public legacy?

My theory (based on nothing ;) ) is that Biden's comments weren't unexpected at all. That they were a way of kind of softening people up to expect something, to put it out there that this was being talked about in the Administration. I think it was planned all along.

Maybe I watched too much "TheWest Wing". :)

[wendmatt]

YAY Obama!

[marymoo86]

The cynic in me is wondering how convenient his "evolvement" is during election year......

I should clarify that my opinions are based on how little I believe the words that come out of any politician's mouth

[kijip]

I have long considered it an act of political cowardice on his part to not say this, as it was abundantly clear reading between the lines that he was there but thinking it was too radioactive politically to be honest about. Don't get me wrong, I voted for him in 2008 and I will do the same this year, but his very late arrival to this issue is one reason I think he has alienated the Democratic wing of the democratic party.

On the whole, I think it could help or hurt him at this point. But I am glad that he finally doesn't care about the potential for it to hurt, even though I personally thought "it's about freakin time" rather than "how brave".

[larig]

I think Andrew Sullivan's perspective on things is interesting (http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/05/obama-lets-go-of-fear.html). As he said last night in an interview on NPR, Obama's words were like a salve on a deep deep wound.

[wellyes]

I liked this piece from Brookings (http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2012/0509_gay_marriage_obama_rauch.aspx) about the potential impact:
"With his switch from ambivalence to advocacy, Obama is sending a signal to the courts that the country is ready for gay marriage, giving them cover to uphold it. Courts like to stay within the mainstream. Obama has just moved it"

[Globetrotter]

I was so happy to hear him say that. Finally! I think gay marriage is the civil rights issue for our time, and we need our leaders to take a stand to give people more rights instead of taking them away. I'm a religious person, but I've never understood why same sex couples couldn't have a legal marriage and leave it up to each religion to decide if they could have a religious marriage as well.


:yeahthat: I think it took guts for him to say that.. Glad he finally did it.

[soontobe]

I happen to think this was a very smart political move. If he really thought he would lose the election for his Statment I don't think he would have made it

[wendibird22]

I'm so pleased! And I was particularly touched with how he was somewhat influenced by his daughters. How they have friends with same sex parents and how he couldn't think of any way to explain to them why it was ok for he and Michelle to have benefits that their friends' parents could not.

[Globetrotter]

I'm so pleased! And I was particularly touched with how he was somewhat influenced by his daughters. How they have friends with same sex parents and how he couldn't think of any way to explain to them why it was ok for he and Michelle to have benefits that their friends' parents could not.


I was just going to say this! I liked how he made it personal.

[elektra]

It's always important and good to hear people who are conservative in other areas say things like this. I know a lot of conservatives who support gay marriage, and I appreciate them for that.

I know there are cynics out there who will point out that he said he "personally" supports it, because that does not require specific policy action, and there are those who will point out the donations made to Obama by the GLBT community, but I honestly believe that he does support gay marriage and that it's not a political ploy aimed at that part of his constituency.

This is the take that one of my Facebook friends has- that it really means little what Obama's personal beliefs are (I always figured that he was probably personally ok with it), it's what his policy decisions will be that really matter. My FB friend was basically saying, that is great and all but where is the Federal legislation that would allow all people to marry?
He thought it was political pandering and somehow tied to Obama's visit to liberal California.
I always am interested is what this particular FB friend has to say too because he is super conservative and also gay.

I do see his point. But don't things have to start somewhere? I can see Obama not wanting focus a ton of effort on this right now, in light of him where we are at in the countdown to the election and him needing to address other issues, like the economy. So it does make sense to throw this out there and maybe wait till he is re-elected to actually do anything about it.

[wellyes]

I do see his point. But don't things have to start somewhere? I can see Obama not wanting focus a ton of effort on this right now, in light of him where we are at in the countdown to the election and him needing to address other issues, like the economy. So it does make sense to throw this out there and maybe wait till he is re-elected to actually do anything about it.

It has, so far, been a state issue entirely. The only thing he can do at this point is advocate.

[mommylamb]

It has, so far, been a state issue entirely. The only thing he can do at this point is advocate.

Actually Obama has already taken one action available to him at the Federal level. Last year he instructed the Justice department not to defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act. Repealing DOMA though would be very difficult. Sure, he could advocate for that, but I can't imagine it happening anytime soon.

[sntm]

I'm thAnkful he did it (said as someone who has only ever voted Republican). I honestly haven't voted in several years, as I've grown completely disillusioned by the Republican party but disagree with enough Democratic policies that I didn't feel comfortable voting for them either. Acknowldeging the lateness of his decision finally to speak out, I still have new respect for him.

[maestramommy]

I am surprised by the number of people here and elsewhere that say, "what took him so long??" As I remember in 2008, he said personally he believed that marriage was between a man and a woman, but that it was a state level matter. So I was very (pleasantly!) surprised to hear of this turnaround. Can't a person be allowed to evolve? That is what happened to me, and to many people who started out thinking homosexuality is a sin, and changed their minds over the course of many years, or maybe even in a very short time, based on a life changing event or whatever. I changed my perspective after reading a book.

[elektra]

Actually Obama has already taken one action available to him at the Federal level. Last year he instructed the Justice department not to defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act. Repealing DOMA though would be very difficult. Sure, he could advocate for that, but I can't imagine it happening anytime soon.

I did not remember that. Thanks for that info! Found this article mentioning it too. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/obamas-legal-progression-on-defense-of-marriage-act/

[jenfromnj]

I liked this piece from Brookings (http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2012/0509_gay_marriage_obama_rauch.aspx) about the potential impact:

"With his switch from ambivalence to advocacy, Obama is sending a signal to the courts that the country is ready for gay marriage, giving them cover to uphold it. Courts like to stay within the mainstream. Obama has just moved it"

From what I've read, one of the main motivations for Amendment 1 was to protect the same-sex marriage ban from judicial "intervention", since overturning the ban would now need to be achieved by another vote.

As for Obama's statements, add me to the "it's about time" camp. While I am glad that he's finally said what he did, I do wonder what motivated him to do so at this particular moment in time.

[brittone2]

From what I've read, one of the main motivations for Amendment 1 was to protect the same-sex marriage ban from judicial "intervention", since overturning the ban would now need to be achieved by another vote.

As for Obama's statements, add me to the "it's about time" camp. While I am glad that he's finally said what he did, I do wonder what motivated him to do so at this particular moment in time.
Firing up the liberal base maybe, since they've been rather disillusioned in many cases? I just got a fundraising email a min ago saying "if you are proud of our president, this is a great time to make a donation to the campaign."

I am happy he finally spoke up, but I am also in the "it's about time," camp.

[daisysmom]

It's always important and good to hear people who are conservative in other areas say things like this. I know a lot of conservatives who support gay marriage, and I appreciate them for that.

.

I just wanted to throw in here that I am very fiscally conservative and generally vote Republican, and I fully support gay marriage (and am pro-choice). My dear cousin is in a gay marriage raising two adopted children of a different race. I know their worries of health insurance, etc. are very real.

While I don't generally agree with President Obama, I was very glad to see what he did. And I went to lawschool in NC for 3 years, and I was very sad to see what the voters in that state did.

[citymama]

This was posted on a gay friend's Facebook status update (slightly altered to protect privacy) and as someone with gay and transgendered family members myself, I couldn't agree more:

"To all those saying "what took him so damn long" about Obama's support of gay marriage, I'd like to point you to that large chunk of the country that is so afraid of sex they're attacking birth control. This man is those people's president too, and he's got a job to do - a politician's job. Last night I got to tell my daughters about Obama being the first US President to support gay marriage — something worth celebration not criticism."

Remember also that President Obama is a practicing Christian and although we think of him as progressive and liberal, it's absolutely possible that his comfort level with same-sex marriage has changed over the years. My uber-progressive, non-religious, tolerant dad is totally comfortable with gay civil unions, and with his gay relatives, but he just doesn't get why gay couples want "marriage." One day, he too will evolve, I know he will.

[Jo..]

I am surprised by the number of people here and elsewhere that say, "what took him so long??" As I remember in 2008, he said personally he believed that marriage was between a man and a woman, but that it was a state level matter. So I was very (pleasantly!) surprised to hear of this turnaround. Can't a person be allowed to evolve? That is what happened to me, and to many people who started out thinking homosexuality is a sin, and changed their minds over the course of many years, or maybe even in a very short time, based on a life changing event or whatever. I changed my perspective after reading a book.

Only, he's not evolving, he's campaigning. ALL politicians make me puke in my mouth a little bit. To me, Obama strikes me as particularly smarmy.

PS Susan, a fellow conservative here who also believes that love is love. I just don't think that Obama believes that.

[JMS]

Only, he's not evolving, he's campaigning.
PS Susan, a fellow conservative here who also believes that love is love. I just don't think that Obama believes that.


:yeahthat: (my emphasis bolded)

[citymama]

Only, he's not evolving, he's campaigning.


See, I think he's speaking his conscience and taking a principled stand even if it is going to cost him at the polls. If that's an election-winning strategy, we've come a loooooong way, baby. It would love to think that a pro-gay marriage stance is what most of the electorate wants to see - it gives me goosebumps just thinking that might be true! I believe that one day, it will be, but for now, Obama is definitely taking a chance with his public position supporting gay marriage.

[wildfire]

I am taking it with a HUGE grain of salt. I think he has always been for it and in the last election when he said it was between a man and a woman, that was pandering to the conservative side of moderates. He said “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages,” while running in 1996 for Illinois state Senate. Then he was undecided. Then it was between a man and a woman. And now he's "evolved" back to his original viewpoint. Seems very political to me rather than being motivated by making a principled stand. It also seems like it was prompted by Biden's slip of the mouth.

I think it would've had FAR more impact if he had come out with that BEFORE the NC vote, and maybe even did some campaigning for gay rights down there while he was at it. Maybe the constitutional amendment would not have passed if he had.

[ChunkyNicksChunkyMom]

:yeahthat: (my emphasis bolded)

I have no idea or opinion on what he really thinks. I find it humorous, however, that when a member of *our* own party is changing opinions he is *evolving* whereas if a member of *that other party* changes directions it is *waffling or flip-flopping*.

[cindys]

Only, he's not evolving, he's campaigning.

:yeahthat:

Cindy
Mama to 3 boys...20, 6 & 3 :heartbeat::heartbeat::heartbeat:

[chottumommy]

I don't fault the president for acting "politically." He IS a politician and acts accordingly especially leading up to an election but at least he's a politician whose moral compass is expansive and inclusive. And for that I applaud him.

[marymoo86]

See, I think he's speaking his conscience and taking a principled stand even if it is going to cost him at the polls. If that's an election-winning strategy, we've come a loooooong way, baby. It would love to think that a pro-gay marriage stance is what most of the electorate wants to see - it gives me goosebumps just thinking that might be true! I believe that one day, it will be, but for now, Obama is definitely taking a chance with his public position supporting gay marriage.

20% of his highest earning donors are gay so I don't think it is a big stretch to see how this would not be beneficial......

I truly hope he has become enlightened and perhaps the how/why/when is not as important. Just seems a bit convenient.

"A review of Obama’s top bundlers, who have brought in $500,000 or more for the campaign, shows that about one in six publicly identify themselves as gay. His overall list of bundlers also includes a number of gay couples who have wed in jurisdictions where same-sex marriage was legal."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/same-sex-marriage-debate-many-of-obamas-top-fundraisers-are-gay/2012/05/09/gIQASJYSDU_story.html

[citymama]

20% of his highest earning donors are gay so I don't think it is a big stretch to see how this would not be beneficial......

"A review of Obama’s top bundlers, who have brought in $500,000 or more for the campaign, shows that about one in six publicly identify themselves as gay. His overall list of bundlers also includes a number of gay couples who have wed in jurisdictions where same-sex marriage was legal."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/same-sex-marriage-debate-many-of-obamas-top-fundraisers-are-gay/2012/05/09/gIQASJYSDU_story.html

One in six (not 20%) of donors doesn't translate into more votes. Ultimately, I think the people who were going to vote for him for his views on this issue were already going to show up and vote. What this will do is galvanize a conservative base of voters who would not have wanted to show up and vote for Romney - Mormon, former Mass. governor, once-moderate, Romney. In the ultimate equation - and at the poll booth, where it matters - this is more likely to hurt, than help Obama. I hope it doesn't, and I also dream of a day when "campaigning" means speaking out in favor of controversial, progressive issues!

[mommy111]

20% of his highest earning donors are gay so I don't think it is a big stretch to see how this would not be beneficial......

"A review of Obama’s top bundlers, who have brought in $500,000 or more for the campaign, shows that about one in six publicly identify themselves as gay. His overall list of bundlers also includes a number of gay couples who have wed in jurisdictions where same-sex marriage was legal."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/same-sex-marriage-debate-many-of-obamas-top-fundraisers-are-gay/2012/05/09/gIQASJYSDU_story.html
But don't you also think its a great way to mobilize the evangelical Christian republican base behind Romney about whom they have been lukewarm at best in the past? This is certainly a double edged sword. If he was doing this to play safe, he would have left the issue alone after Biden's statement. Fighting on an economy that is improving palpably, against a republican opponent who is only lukewarmly supported by the republican base, the safest bet for him would be to stay the course and not touch gay marriage or contraception/abortion with a 10ft pole.

[marymoo86]

One in six (not 20%) of donors doesn't translate into more votes. Ultimately, I think the people who were going to vote for him for his views on this issue were already going to show up and vote. What this will do is galvanize a conservative base of voters who would not have wanted to show up and vote for Romney - Mormon, former Mass. governor, once-moderate, Romney. In the ultimate equation - and at the poll booth, where it matters - this is more likely to hurt, than help Obama. I hope it doesn't, and I also dream of a day when "campaigning" means speaking out in favor of controversial, progressive issues!

Ok - so 17%


But don't you also think its a great way to mobilize the evangelical Christian republican base behind Romney about whom they have been lukewarm at best in the past? This is certainly a double edged sword. If he was doing this to play safe, he would have left the issue alone after Biden's statement. Fighting on an economy that is improving palpably, against a republican opponent who is only lukewarmly supported by the republican base, the safest bet for him would be to stay the course and not touch gay marriage or contraception/abortion with a 10ft pole.

It is May. What this does is rouse his supporters for donations that will hopefully translate into votes. This issue will be long forgotten by November but the dollars won't be.

[larig]

I am taking it with a HUGE grain of salt. I think he has always been for it and in the last election when he said it was between a man and a woman, that was pandering to the conservative side of moderates. He said “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages,” while running in 1996 for Illinois state Senate. Then he was undecided. Then it was between a man and a woman. And now he's "evolved" back to his original viewpoint. Seems very political to me rather than being motivated by making a principled stand. It also seems like it was prompted by Biden's slip of the mouth.

I think it would've had FAR more impact if he had come out with that BEFORE the NC vote, and maybe even did some campaigning for gay rights down there while he was at it. Maybe the constitutional amendment would not have passed if he had.

I don't think Obama campaigning for it would have had any impact on it passing or not. Thom Hartmann (a progressive radio/tv host) had great analysis of this yesterday. He suggested that if he'd come out before the vote then the media would have tied the loss to obama "see, people voted against obama" they'd have spun it as an Obama loss. Coming out after also changed the story of the day from "loss for marriage equality" to "president pro marriage equality." I know his announcement buoyed my spirits after the whole NC thing yesterday.

As to whether or not it's political, well, the man is running for president, by virtue of that fact anything he does is political. But, that does not make it insincere. I myself evolved from thinking that the state should ONLY recognize civil unions between ALL couples (i.e., they should get out of the marriage business altogether), to believing only marriage equality is acceptable. My original position was in part in deference to religious people's view of marriage, but now I think that the beliefs of one group should not be used as an excuse to oppress another. It shames me a bit to admit that I held another position in the past.

[brittone2]

II think he has always been for it and in the last election when he said it was between a man and a woman, that was pandering to the conservative side of moderates. He said “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages,” while running in 1996 for Illinois state Senate. Then he was undecided. Then it was between a man and a woman. And now he's "evolved" back to his original viewpoint. Seems very political to me rather than being motivated by making a principled stand. It also seems like it was prompted by Biden's slip of the mouth.

I think it would've had FAR more impact if he had come out with that BEFORE the NC vote, and maybe even did some campaigning for gay rights down there while he was at it.
I agree with most of this. I campaigned for Obama last time around but have no plans to do so this time. I know he's caught between a rock and a hard place much of the time, but yeah, my enthusiasm isn't there. I'm glad he did it, but I do feel frustrated it has taken this long. And yes, I think he has always supported it in reality.

[mommylamb]

I just can't see this as something that's entirely politically motivated on his part. I mean, yes there are people who took out their check book yesterday (and probably would have made those donations at some point regardless), and sure he has a lot of support from the GLBT community, but there are lots of risks associated with taking this stance. I agree with mommy111 and citymama that people who oppose gay marriage and aren't revved up about Romney are motivated to come out to vote because of this. I don't think this issue fades into the background for those people.

The fact is, he's a politician. Of course he's campaigning. That doesn't mean he doesn't believe what he says. Sorry, I just don't think "politician" is a dirty word. Yes, it would have been more damaging for him to have made this statement in the middle of October. So what?

[wellyes]

This is more risk than benefit IMO. He is saying something socially conservative democrats may not like and that is a huge part of his support. Minorities and Catholics.

[elbenn]

Obama said that it should be a state issue. I thought even if a state legalizes gay marriage, that the Defense of Marriage Act signed by Clinton would still not allow gay couples to have all the same rights and privileges as other married people under federal law. If this is the case, then it is also a federal issue, and it seems that President Obama should try to get that legislation changed.

[kijip]

I am surprised by the number of people here and elsewhere that say, "what took him so long??" As I remember in 2008, he said personally he believed that marriage was between a man and a woman, but that it was a state level matter. So I was very (pleasantly!) surprised to hear of this turnaround. Can't a person be allowed to evolve?

I believe that his earlier stance was based on politics. I don't truly believe that he was totally against equal marriage back then. I believe he was willing to say that to reach the national stage in 2004 and be electable in 2008. During the Clinton-Obama primary battle it struck me that Obama was way more conservative than he was perceived/setting out to be and Clinton was far more liberal than she was running on (she was angling for the experienced, more middle of the road electability in the general card). However, regardless of how conservative he is, his stance on gay marriage did not ring true for me then. I think transformation is the explanation for the delay. I think the transformation thing rings true for a lot of moderates and conservatives who have had the same transformation but I was very skeptical of how his statement was worded.

That said I don't delude myself into thinking that national canidates can always speak their minds openly. I don't see that (on either side of the political spectrum) as terrible smarmy politico crap, I see it as a political reality.

[mommylamb]

Obama said that it should be a state issue. I thought even if a state legalizes gay marriage, that the Defense of Marriage Act signed by Clinton would still not allow gay couples to have all the same rights and privileges as other married people under federal law. If this is the case, then it is also a federal issue, and it seems that President Obama should try to get that legislation changed.

This is true, but there's a big difference between supporting gay marriage and putting political capital behind overturning DOMA, which doesn't have a chance in hell. As I said up-thread, he already told DOJ not to defend the constitutionality of that law because he doesn't believe it's constitutional.

[kijip]

I agree with most of this. I campaigned for Obama last time around but have no plans to do so this time. I know he's caught between a rock and a hard place much of the time, but yeah, my enthusiasm isn't there. I'm glad he did it, but I do feel frustrated it has taken this long. And yes, I think he has always supported it in reality.

I totally understand and sympathize. I have had those feelings myself. The problem with this thinking is the havoc that his opponent can have as President. Is Obama perfect? No. But he is the best hope those with progressive ideas on social issues an d economics have in this race.

[wildfire]

As to whether or not it's political, well, the man is running for president, by virtue of that fact anything he does is political. But, that does not make it insincere. I myself evolved from thinking that the state should ONLY recognize civil unions between ALL couples (i.e., they should get out of the marriage business altogether), to believing only marriage equality is acceptable. My original position was in part in deference to religious people's view of marriage, but now I think that the beliefs of one group should not be used as an excuse to oppress another. It shames me a bit to admit that I held another position in the past.

I believe he is sincere. THIS time. I don't think he was sincere during the last election when he said it should be between a man and a woman. I think the 1996 stance of supporting it is his true colors. I think the "undecided" and "only a man and a woman" were politically motivated. So I have trouble saying he's taking a principled stand when he could've been making that stand ALL ALONG and instead chose to hide his true feelings for political gain. Not that all politicians don't do it to some extent, but this is hardly an "evolution" and more political flip flopping.

[anonomom]

I have no idea or opinion on what he really thinks. I find it humorous, however, that when a member of *our* own party is changing opinions he is *evolving* whereas if a member of *that other party* changes directions it is *waffling or flip-flopping*.

I believe you are mistaken. Wasn't the story of the 2004 election Kerry's "flip-flopping?"

FWIW, I am in the "what took so long?" camp, though I do believe Obamas's current position is sincerely held. I thought his stance on the issue in 2008 was both politically motivated and cowardly.

[kijip]

I believe you are mistaken. Wasn't the story of the 2004 election Kerry's "flip-flopping?"

Well most of the flip flopping remarks about Kerry were made by Republicans. You are at least somewhat correct- the same Republicans who disparaged Kerry seem way more tolerant of the shifting views of Romney.

That said I personally think flop flipper is an overused hack political insult. I personally would have a hard time voting for someone that shows no ability to change their mind on anything ever. It leads to people being unwilling to reflect on and learn from their own mistakes.

I do think that while this is late and not an actually new belief for Obama, it does take some guts to be the first President with the only sound opinion on equal marriage. Believing that the government should interfere with families and deprive people of civil rights based on the gender of who they love is flat out absurd. Being the first President to acknowledge this is a big deal and a big step in the right direction. But yeah, it is really late, however politically necessary his man/woman thing was in the past for the national stage.

[wellyes]

House Reps have made it impossible for Obama to fight DOMA. Remember this on voting day. They have indeed chosen thr wrong side of history http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76147.html

[citymama]

This article spells out the risks of Obama's pro-gay marriage stance, particularly in the South and swing states such as Virginia:

Obama and gay marriage: What he's risking in an election year
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-gay-marriage-risks-20120509,0,255345.story

[AnnieW625]

took him too damn long to make this statement. My thoughts when i read it were, 'what took you so long'. It is a shame he had to be backed into this by his VP

agreed. We all knew he believed it so it isn't much of a surprise to me.

[TwinFoxes]

I find it humorous, however, that when a member of *our* own party is changing opinions he is *evolving* whereas if a member of *that other party* changes directions it is *waffling or flip-flopping*.


I believe you are mistaken. Wasn't the story of the 2004 election Kerry's "flip-flopping?"



Chunky says she's conservative, so Kerry would be "the other party". I think it's a great point.

I have no idea what the President's true feelings are. But I know people who couldn't understand why domestic partnership wasn't enough, but as time went on and the issue got more and more attention they totally "got" it and now understand why it's a big deal and support gay marriage. I had never been in the closet out and proud gay friends who not that long ago were dismissively saying "marriage is for straights" when the topic came up. And remember, it was only 11 years ago that The Netherlands became the first country to recognize gay marriage is legal. It's still a pretty new idea for a lot of people. I'm not saying things are moving fast enough, but I guess I'm not that surprised that they don't move faster.

[larig]

I believe he is sincere. THIS time. I don't think he was sincere during the last election when he said it should be between a man and a woman. I think the 1996 stance of supporting it is his true colors. I think the "undecided" and "only a man and a woman" were politically motivated. So I have trouble saying he's taking a principled stand when he could've been making that stand ALL ALONG and instead chose to hide his true feelings for political gain. Not that all politicians don't do it to some extent, but this is hardly an "evolution" and more political flip flopping.

I think I didn't explain myself well enough. My point was that I think that is possible to hold the view that you want equality, but simultaneously search for a way to active that without rocking the boat too much. I think civil unions were an attempt in the mind of some of us who supported them to take a step toward equality. My personal belief was that it was that it was necessary to cow-tow to a group's (not my group) religious beliefs. In other words, I was willing to cede the word marriage. because the larger goal for me was for LGBT people to have the same legal rights as straights. I was willing to compromise on what it was called. I thought this was a way forward that would allow groups to each be able to claim some form of victory. So, I still held the principle that I wanted gay people to have the same rights I did, and I think it is possible to hold that view and simultaneously look for productive ways to achieve that goal without driving religious conservatives crazy. It seemed away to take way the "preserve the sanctity of marriage" argument that people who are anti-marriage equality use. So, I think he did experience an evolution of thought, as I did, even though we had wanted equality all along as an end-goal. Certainly I could be wrong about Obama, just suggesting that it is possible.

[Globetrotter]

If that's an election-winning strategy, we've come a loooooong way, baby

Seriously!

Alas, I think it may cost him some votes but it was refreshing to hear it.