Posted on 05/08/2012 11:55:37 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Is the new sensitivity on the gay-marriage issue at Team Obama really all that new? Last week, the White House scheduled a visit to North Carolina today to talk about the economy, which would have been interesting enough in a state with a jobless rate above the national average. With traditional-marriage Amendment One appearing to be headed for victory, the White House changed direction two hours later and said the President was unavailable to speak in the Tarheel State, a fact reported today in North Carolina:
President Barack Obama was scheduled, albeit briefly, to visit North Carolina on Election Day to make an speech in Asheville about the economy.
But the White House sent the notice Wednesday last week but reversed course about five hours later, saying the trip wasn't taking place, according to a North Carolina congressional office notified about the trip. The false alarm isn't unprecedented — but the fact the White House even considered visiting the state on primary election day is interesting.
A controversial vote on a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and civil unions is on today’s ballot. Obama issued a statement against the amendment earlier this year — but polls show it is likely to win by a solid margin.
That decision preceded Joe Biden’s comments on Sunday, which makes it appear that Biden may really have gone off the reservation. Had Obama spoken today, there is little doubt he would have had to address Amendment One at some point. How could Obama have responded? Arguing that he’s still “evolving” while publicly opposing the amendment would have produced some awkward and incoherent moments. So much for leadership.
It’s a shame we missed that, but North Carolina’s embattled governor gave us a demonstration of what it would have looked like today. Governor Bev Perdue backed the current statutory language banning gay marriage, but opposes the amendment to the state constitution that would put the issue out of the reach of activist judges. Suddenly, Perdue thinks that this issue doesn’t belong on ballots and needs a “national conversation,” which prompts Chuck Todd to ask her how Perdue can possibly square this circle:
It’s a headscratcher, all right, especially the claim that this amendment has nothing to do with gay marriage. Here’s the text of the amendment:
“Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.
This section does not prohibit a private party from entering into contracts with another private party; nor does this section prohibit courts from adjudicating the rights of private parties pursuant to such contracts.”
So domestic partnerships would still be legal, as they are now in North Carolina. The amendment only changes the status of the legal definition of marriage from statute to constitutional amendment while protecting private contracts such as domestic partnerships. In other words, it’s only about same-sex marriage, not about taking rights away from anyone, as the Salisbury Post tacitly notes in their analysis:
What will happen if the amendment fails?
Same-sex marriage will remain illegal under a 1996 North Carolina law. Civil unions still will not be offered to either same-sex or opposite-sex couples, but the state could pass a law to allow them.
There will be no constitutional ban on either gay marriage or civil unions, meaning a state court could one day strike down existing law as unconstitutional.
What will happen if the amendment passes?
It will be added to the state Constitution, meaning a three-fifths majority of state legislators would have to agree to repeal it.
The amendment would prohibit both same-sex marriage and civil unions, or legal unions with equivalent rights to marriage.
Just as in Minnesota this fall, the amendment gives voters in North Carolina a chance to keep judges from redefining marriage from the bench. That’s it. And if Perdue and Obama agree that the legal definition of marriage should be one-man-one-woman and that any other definition should be reached through means of representative democracy rather than declaration by judicial fiat, they should have no problem with Amendment One. Perdue — and Obama — want to have it both ways, and as Chuck Todd implies, that’s nothing less than sheer incoherence.
His opinion on ss marriage is still evolving, don’t cha’ know. That’s why he bailed.
Republicans should rub it into gays that their evolving leader Obama jumped ship and left them alone on the battle-field in NC, a little taste of demoralization never hurts,.
It’s all about LOVE.
RE: His opinion on ss marriage is still evolving
His mind is MOST DEFINITELY MADE UP and HE IS FOR GAY MARRIAGE.
He just does not want to make it public at this time.
Give him a second term and you’ll see how right I am.
Brave Sir Barack ran away.
Bravely ran away, away!
When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Sir Barack turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave, Sir Barack!
Gutless crap weasel, thy name is Obama...
Every one has lost if left to the PEOPLE to choose. It's why gay marriage has to be legislated from the Bench.
This from a recent AFA Action Alert. Very disturbing.
Sears resumes selling the worst in human depravity
Sears’ explicit DVD offerings include domination, bondage
May 7, 2012
Breaking its promise, Sears is again offering hard-core pornographic products on its website. Not just a few X-rated products, but scores of them!
Last year, Sears promised to stop selling X-rated products. In our subsequent monitoring of sears.com, AFA found that Sears has resumed selling sexually explicit products featuring human bondage and sado-masochism.
When AFA questioned Sears about “Ursula’s Revenge - A novel of erotic lesbian domination,” the spokesman commented about the quality of the book cover (nudity) and called it a “wonderful choice.” He then offered to complete a sale of the product to AFA and have it shipped immediately.
I hope you will take my word for it, but if you must see the proof, AFA has set up a Sears product sample page.
http://action.afa.net/Detail.aspx?id=2147520953
Warning: the material is extremely graphic and offensive, although it has been edited by us.
Technology allows Sears to remove and stop selling these products within minutes, if they want too. AFA has tried several times to reach out to Sears quietly and professionally. Basically, their single response was, “These porn products meet our terms and conditions” for online products.
Take Action
Funny, he couldn’t do what he did as Senator and be (vote) present.
Oh, I am sure that most Gays know that Obama is waiting until a second term to safely announce his support of SS marriage and they are being patient. They will not abandon him because without him they know there is no chance for this to become a national law.
Mark Levin made a very good point on this today I liked.
Obama says he is for LGBT (”lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender” ) RIGHTS and so Levin asks: Exactly what special ‘rights’ do bisexuals have?
Lets expand this . Do bisexuals have the right to marry both sexes at the same time because they were born with that orientation? This really is a great approach to take when rebutting the ‘civil rights’ arguments from libs.
On a pessimistic side, Obama got a break that the NC marriage referendum was during the primary and not the general election in November. It's a shame we have NO national party that can argue this issue on our side,
Even better, these fools are now stuck with Charlotte for their Rat convention!
Dumb Dems decided to hold their convention in NC thinking that would help them carry the state this Fall. I think they are going to realize real soon that they are wasting their time there. Watch for Obama Ad buys to disappear in NC this Fall.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.