Today I was surprised by a delicate twist of illogic coming from the mouth of one of my heroes, President Obama. What was this illogic?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: I think gays and lesbians, uh, have a friend in the White House because I've consistently committed myself to civil unions, making sure that they have the ability to visit each other in hospitals, uh, that they are able to access benefits, uh, that they are, uh, have a whole host of legal rights that they currently, uh, do not have. Uh, I don't think that, uh, it makes sense for, uh, the federal government to get in the business of determining what marriage is, uh, that isn't, uh, traditionally the federal government's role.
How many "uh"s did you count? Me too.
"Not in the business of determining what marriage is?" Really, President Obama? But traditionally, by inaction and association, our government has indeed repeatedly redefined marriage - and by not ensuring that the definition of marriage isn't applicable to the broadest segment of the population possible (I exempt children and those too incapicated to be able to make such important decisions), isn't our government implicitly supporting one particular definition - and thus clearly participating in the business of determining what marriage is?
No offense, President Obama, but you clearly have it wrong on this issue. You're like one of a group of kids in the schoolyard who exclude another child from playing kickball and who, when confronted about their impolite behavior and asked to include that other child, say "I'm sorry, but we're not in the business of determining who can and can't play kickball. We've already decided on the teams and they're going to stay that way." Yeah, it makes no sense to me, either, but the illusion satisfies our imaginary kid's desire to stay on the team and justify their participation, active or passive, in that exclusion.
Your comment in the above quote also seems to pretend ignorance of the push in recent years for legislatures to clearly define marriage as between a man and a woman, or legislation and policy such as "Don't ask, don't tell," and the Defense of Marriage act, which have all appeared in our lifetimes. Our government LOVES determining what marriage is!
The phrasing allows us to forget that we have a responsibility to protect the rights of all Americans. We have faced that responsibility again and again, as you reminded us during campaign speeches filled with references to the civil rights movement and exhortations about social responsibility.
And sadly, you don't acknowledge the fact that in the past few generations governments, including ours, have controlled the ability of slaves to marry, people of different races to marry each other, and even attempted to keep Deaf people from marrying each other! (Impossible you should be ignorant of any of this.)
In each of the above cases, moral reasons were given for these determinations, just as similar morality is used today by conservative groups to oppose the marriage of two men or two women. In each of these cases, the true reason for such opposition has far more to do with control and maintained status than "morality:" an all-too-human form of hypocrisy.
President Obama, you draw deeply from the well of your own heritage. On both sides of that heritage you have family who have experienced and survived the devastating effects of such hypocrisy. I understand that there are times when political expediency is important. I encourage you, however, not to sacrifice wisdom for the sake of such expediency. All American citizens deserve the right to marry people whom they choose, who can choose. In supporting people's freedom to marry, I am asking the government to stop determining who has that right, not to start. It's my responsibility as an American citizen to speak up about this issue and yours to acknowledge the truth and do something about it.
Hat tip to Americablog.com, on which website I was first exposed to this continued insanity.