President Obama opposes gay marriage, but does support civil union between same-sex couples. I think most would say he contradicts himself by supporting gay marriage, but not following through and making sure they receive the same rights as other married couples. I can see how his hesitation can make it confusing to determine which side he truly stands for. However, I can also see how absolute support of gay marriage might put him in a position to alienate those who are against it. I, personally, see no reason why same-sex couples should be denied the right to marry one another. Then again, I am not president nor can I imagine the pressure that comes with trying to be for everyone when there are hardly any instances in which everyone agrees. Given President Obama’s recent actions, I would think he would respond to Nava and Dawidoff by trying to find a way to appeal to all sides, as most politicians are wont to do. I can’t say I think it would be the right course of action though.
On the contradiction side he is actually supports them on a civil matter, yet federal he present the as being a tough opponent. When you say “those” do you mean republicans? For alienating Obama we have to talk in general why is he being alienate? Yet, appealing to all sides may be an argument for the fact of saying he is for them but not in at the federal level, the federal level hasn’t passed to recognize same-sex as an issue. Being at the political level on may have to really reason on their principles. Therefore, they take a stands to argument their core principalities.
ReplyDelete