iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Geoffrey R. Stone

GET UPDATES FROM Geoffrey R. Stone
 

Same-Sex Marriage and Interracial Marriage: What Do Barack Obama and Abraham Lincoln Have in Common?

Posted: 08/12/10 02:45 AM ET

In 1996, as a candidate for the Illinois State Senate, Barack Obama expressed his "unequivocal support for gay marriage." Then he changed his mind. Since bursting onto the national stage, he has repeatedly insisted that he opposes gay marriage.

Indeed, only a day after last week's decision in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, which held Proposition 8 unconstitutional, the President's spokesman reminded the public in no uncertain terms that "the President does oppose same-sex marriage."

At the same time, though, President Obama does support "equal marriage rights for gays and lesbians" -- as long as they are not married. That is, he supports civil unions. O.K., but why does he oppose same-sex marriage?

The President has suggested that his religious beliefs have shaped his views about same-sex marriage. In an interview with the Chicago Tribune, he explained: "I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."

Did Mr. Obama's religious beliefs change between 1996 and 2008? If so, I'd be curious to know how and why. (I understand, of course, that this should be none of my business, and I feel somewhat creepy even posing the question. But if the President is, in fact, relying even in part on his religious beliefs to justify official government policy, then he has made it my business.)

On examination, I'm not clear what religious beliefs he is invoking. In The Audacity of Hope, Mr. Obama wrote that he "was not raised in a religious household." Indeed, he described his mother as quite detached from religion, his father as a "confirmed atheist," and his stepfather as "a man who saw religion as not particularly useful."

Of course, people often find religion later in life, and as Mr. Obama tells his story, he found religion in his twenties when he worked with black churches in Chicago as a community organizer. Through that experience, he came to understand "the power of the African-American religious tradition to spur social change." This is surely good, but one might suppose that "spurring social change" in the twenty-first century might well include the support of same-sex marriage.

It is not so simple, however, because religion and same-sex marriage frequently don't mix, so perhaps this isn't the sort of "social change" he had in mind. It is interesting, though, that on July 4, 2005, the United Church of Christ -- the denomination with which Mr. Obama identified for some two decades in Chicago -- became the first mainline Protestant denomination officially to embrace same-sex marriage.

Be that as it may, the President's religious beliefs are hardly a legitimate basis for official government action. And Mr. Obama the teacher of constitutional law surely knows this as well as anyone. But if his personal religious beliefs are not the foundation for his opposition to same-sex marriage, then what is? Surely, he owes the American people a candid and reasoned explanation of his position. This is, after all, one of the most profound civil rights issues our nation is grappling with during his presidency.

Cynics might suggest that, as a liberal, Mr. Obama privately supports same-sex marriage, but, as a politician, he publicly opposes it. After all, a majority of Americans oppose same-sex marriage, and a president who took the side of the minority on this issue would be taking a political risk. And, besides, the president is supposed to follow the views of the majority, especially on legal and moral issues, right?

This brings me back to the President's family. Mr. Obama's parents were lawfully married in Hawaii on February 2, 1961. I use the word "lawfully" advisedly, because in 1961 twenty-two states made interracial marriage a crime and more than 90% of the American people opposed interracial marriage. Fortunately for the President, his parents did not bow to the prevailing prejudices of the time.

Like most presidents, President Obama is fond of invoking Abraham Lincoln. Perhaps on the issue of same-sex marriage he is merely following Lincoln's lead. In his 1858 debates with Stephen Douglas, Lincoln firmly declared: "I am not, nor ever have been in favor of [allowing black people] to intermarry with white people."

This may be relevant in several ways. First, it suggests that politicians must consider politics. They cannot throw themselves on the sword of being right. At times, they must rather be president.

But second, as Lincoln noted, he had never been in favor of interracial marriage. That is not the case for Mr. Obama with respect to same-sex marriage. Mr. Obama changed his mind.

Third, at the time Lincoln made his statement, virtually no one supported interracial marriage. That is not the case today with same-sex marriage. To the contrary, the same-sex marriage position today is well within the mainstream of responsible political thought. Indeed, the most recent CNN/Time public opinion survey for the first time shows Americans divided 50-50 on whether gays and lesbians should have a right to marry. Had President Lincoln come out in favor of interracial marriage in 1858, he would have been regarded not only as radical, but as insane. For President Obama to endorse same-sex marriage today would be seen not as radical or crazy, but as principled and courageous. It would be a brilliant example of presidential leadership.

Someday, perhaps twenty-five years from now, the former President's grandchildren may pose the question: "Grandpa, some people in school say that when you were president you opposed same-sex marriage. That's not true, is it, Grandpa?" I am rather confident that, unless he makes this fundamental struggle for civil rights and equal justice his own, Grandpa Barack will be able to offer no answer of which he will not be ashamed.

 
 
 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 587
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (7 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JimmyTX
04:03 PM on 08/13/2010
The first poll in history to show majority support for same sex marriage came out last week. President Obama is a politician. He is a great president and he has my full support, but he is a politician. He opposed gay marriage because it you help him. He was already trailing badly among working class and conservative Democrats in the primaries against Hillary Clinton and he needed to avoid another issue that she could use against him. Once he won the nomination, the gay marriage issue would not have lost him the election although it would have probably lost him Virginia, North Carolina, and Indiana. However, once he took the less risky position in the primaries, he could not pivot to a pro-gay marriage position in the general election.

Will he change his position on this issue in the future? Of course he will, when it is no longer a political liability.
03:45 PM on 08/13/2010
Here's a little secret: Politicians really, really want to keep their jobs, i.e., get re-elected. This affects what they say in public. The President doesn't want to alienate more conservative voters, and knows gays and lesbians don't have another candidate to vote for, any way....so look for him to change his tune on this one in his SECOND term, when he has nothing to lose.
03:26 PM on 08/13/2010
Obama is one of the best presidents the US has ever had. He doesn't support gay marriage. Neither do I. Deal with it!!
05:05 PM on 08/13/2010
Why not? Do you have a dog in this fight?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:48 PM on 08/15/2010
From the sound of it, you don't either. Would that be accrate? Why?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jsgaetano
Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus
11:33 AM on 08/13/2010
I think a better discussion is to show what the hatemongers of the past have in common with the hate-fueled Teabagger GOP of today.
photo
INDIVIDUALTERRY
no to the collective!
01:38 PM on 08/13/2010
Thats a hateful statment!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:51 PM on 08/15/2010
How so? It sounds completely reasonable to me. The Teabaggers have no ideological high-ground. It's all ignorance, fear and hate financed by republicans and corporations.
10:49 AM on 08/13/2010
President Lincoln and Barry Obama have absolutely nothing in common. President Lincoln was one of the greatest presidents in history; Obama is one of the worst.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jsgaetano
Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus
11:34 AM on 08/13/2010
I'm surprised a Teabagger has anything good to say about Lincoln.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:22 PM on 08/13/2010
You're opinion is not valid. We know there are people who hate Obama, but they are just racists.
10:21 AM on 08/13/2010
I think the defence that the president's faith has determined his stance further supports the rulings of the courts that outlawing same sex marriage is unconstitutional.

I didn't elect Rick Warren.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:27 PM on 08/13/2010
Exactly. Fanned.

I believe Obama purposely chose the faith defense because he knew it would have no constitutional basis. That would free him to support it later with a position like,"I can't let my personal feelings about my faith supercede my responsibility to protect the constitution.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:50 PM on 08/13/2010
After twenty years attending a gay-friendly church, the United Church of Christ which also weds gay couples, it finally occurred to Obama that he was wrong to support same-sex marriage - his faith forbids it (and just in time to run for the presidency!). Now it's eventually going to occur to the scholar of the Constitution, as he's called, that, as anyone knows who didn't sleep through high school, religious belief has no place in this debate. Maybe.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ThePlague
Programmer by day, vampire pundit by ni
10:17 AM on 08/13/2010
Dude, I think there is a simple reason the President opposes marriage equality: Ohio 2004. Karl Rove made this a "wedge issue", and cost Senator Kerry some African American support in Ohio over this issue. As a result of the drop in African American support in Ohio, Senator Kerry narrowly lost Ohio, and with it, the election. Especially with the white resentment going on, President Obama needs all the African American support he can get, therefore, he is afraid of these Rovian wedge issues. Is this principled? No. Is it politically smart? Yes. It is just the sad reality of the situation. Were the President still an Illinois State Senator, he would likely still support equality. But you can't be idealistic and be President. That is just the fact of the matter.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jsgaetano
Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus
11:35 AM on 08/13/2010
>Were the President still an Illinois State Senator

I doubt it. Obama wasn't exactly well know for taking a stand on issues.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:28 PM on 08/13/2010
Obama's support for gay marriage was on the record in the Illinois legislature.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:44 AM on 08/13/2010
It fits his status quo mealy-mouth style.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:34 PM on 08/13/2010
A little respect, please. It's unfair to denigrate a politicians efforts to build concensus just because the opposition spits in his face. He is determined to change the tone of the White House even if congressional Republicans see their path back to power is through maintaining the same old partisan antagonism in Greater DC.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
madbonger618
09:43 AM on 08/13/2010
This is not the issue you should be comparing Obama's stance on Gay Marriage to.

Obama took the position that gays should be able to get civil unions with all the benefits of marriage.

It's clearly nothing but an issue of semantics. The same exact thing with different names. It's the perfect moderate position. You give the Right the ability to keep marriage as something only between men and women and you give gays the ability to have everything marriage offers without calling it marriage.

He is not looking to keep anybody from getting any rights or allowing people to discrimate against someone elses rights.

The issue Lincoln had to deal with was Slavery and he took the position that the states that had Slavery could continue to be slave states but slavery would not be allowed in any new territories of the United States. So he was for keeping the status quo but not allowing slavery to be expanded.

Lincoln eventually changed his mind after the south had seceded and after a couple of years of brutal war but he did it when he thought the time was right and did not confer with his cabinet or anyone on this.

I think what we've seen in this country the last few years is a right that is unwilling to agree to civil unions or anything that conveys the rights to gays that married couples enjoy and Prop 8 was an example of that.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:37 PM on 08/13/2010
I agree with most of what you said, but it is important to note that civil unions are not a compromise, but a rhetorical hedge to give moderates cover. There is no constitutional basis to have two separate, but equal, forms of marriage.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TaiJi2
03:55 PM on 08/13/2010
So if one were to enter into a "civil union" with a foreigner, do you think that citizenship would be conferred? If not, we're talking unequal treatment under the law. This president, more than any other before him, should have a strong stance against such discrimination.
photo
bbbbjr
freedom from religion
09:43 AM on 08/13/2010
The comparison between the struggle for gay marriage rights in the 21st century and the struggle for black equality/abolition is a fair one. The question of racial intermarriage was a critical one within the debate for abolition because the people of the South, who's lives at a most basic level were supported by their "property" in slave equity, used interacial marriage as the monster in the closet. They made the repeated statement that Old Abe's goal was abolition as a first step toward total equality which would lead to former slaves marrying your daughters...the most frightening possibility imaginable.

In the 21st Century, those opposed to gay marriage make a similar case whereby allowing it to occur will bring us to a tipping point of acceptance where our straight children will be indoctrinated by our schools and media into the inevitable gay lifestyle.

Both Presidents in question have/had strong beliefs on their own respective issues. Those beliefs HAD to be tempered by a realistic view of the consequnce to their overall agenda. We know from benefit of 150 years of hindsight just about everything about Mr Lincolns personal view on slavery and how he needed to compromise that view in deference to the goal of war victory through the maintaining of the Union coalition of slave and free states (and public support). Maybe at some point in the next 150, Mr Obama's view on the marriage subject and the ebb and flow of that view will become clearer.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:39 PM on 08/13/2010
Well articulated, thank you. Fanned & Faved.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lance734
03:47 PM on 08/13/2010
ditto
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:07 AM on 08/13/2010
"I'm a Christian. And so ... I do believe that tradition and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."

The odd thing is that the Christian church into which Barack Obama was baptized and the only church to which he has ever belonged, the United Church of Christ has supported same-sex marriage since 1996 when this resolution was adopted:

"be it resolved, that the Board of Directors of the United Church of Christ Office for Church in Society affirms equal marriage rights for same sex couples and declares that the State should not interfere with same sex couples who choose to marry and share fully and equally in the rights, responsibilities and commitment of legally recognized marriage; and
. . .
"Further, calls upon UCC conferences, associations, congregations and individuals to engage in serious, respectful, responsible discussion of same-sex marriage in an overall context of addressing family life issues; ..."

And in 2005 reportedly 80% of the delegates supported this resolution:
"LET IT BE RESOLVED, that the Twenty-fifth General Synod of the United Church of Christ affirms equal marriage rights for couples regardless of gender and declares that the government should not interfere with couples regardless of gender who choose to marry and share fully and equally in the rights, responsibilities and commitment of legally recognized marriage;"

As the UCC says "God is still speaking". Perhaps President Obama wasn't listening.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:43 PM on 08/13/2010
Are there really people who believe that a guy who supported gay marriage all his political life just happened to have a religious epiphany just before launching a presidential campaign? Come on DinkSinger, lets focus on the real issues. Don't fall for the theatre.
SouthernBlueBelle
Old and fed up
08:36 AM on 08/13/2010
Well, can someone have personal beliefs that are counter to what the would consider "legal rights"?
I think they can. This might be that case. Legally they have the right to marry, his religous beliefs shouldn't enter into that and perhaps that is his stance.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:44 PM on 08/13/2010
That's the dodge. By blaming his stance on religion he can walk away from it later, integrity intact, on the basis of church/state separation.
08:23 AM on 08/13/2010
As Obama has said: he politics pretty good.
07:29 AM on 08/13/2010
remember the civil rights chant: how long, not long
07:15 AM on 08/13/2010
"For President Obama to endorse same-sex marriage today would be seen not as radical or crazy, but as principled and courageous."

Instead, running counter to the current in his own party, Obama took a "principled and courageous" stand and spoke, dictated by his OWN conscience.

Awesome.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:59 AM on 08/13/2010
It's a crock.

He only switched his public position because he aspired to the White House.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:46 PM on 08/13/2010
True. As any good politician would. I wish people would stop watching the MSM where every remark from a politician is taken at face value.