How could you, Mr. Obama?

For those of you who don't know, this is Barack Obama

With a week and three days to go until Harvey Milk Week on Freedom Requires Wings, we yet again see politics involving itself with the LGBT.

How ridiculous is Obama? How could he involve himself in this issue? Doesn’t he know that all of the Republicans oppose this?

I hope you understand that my first paragraph is meant to be sarcasm. You see the issue here was gay marriage. Obama, on Wednesday 9th May 2012, became the first sitting president in history to openly support marriage equality.

And didn’t the internet just go wild.

#Gayisok trended on Twitter for several hours. The more observant among you will have noticed that I followed this tag for a while, and arguing with the homophobes that decided to appear on the tag. I only found two, really, but weren’t they just ever so friendly. I think one of them told me I was “one of the arrogant gays”, and the other told me that I should “think about it from a scientific point of view: like charges repel, opposites attract.” I almost felt sorry for them. They must get so lonely and confused at life.

But sorry, I’m off track. Obama is in support of gay marriage. This, naturally, caused a bit of a stir in the Republican long grass. Unfortunately, the only Republican to immediately move into action was Christine O’Donnell, lovable basket case that she is. She appeared on Fox News to promote the views of her party.

Spoiler alert: they believe wholeheartedly that marriage should only be between a man and a woman. Except, apparently, Mr Romney, who only started believing it since he started his campaign and realised that right wing nutcases are more likely to vote for him if he danced to their tune.

And people don’t think he’s conservative enough. How little they know.
As an interesting aside, a story popped out recently about how Romney believed that a school peer’s haircut was “too gay” and got his friends to pin him down as he cut it for him. Whether this is true or not (let it never be said that I perpetuate unsubstantiated rumours, right?) maybe it’s a prelude to his policies if he gets into power? Maybe Romney will pin the QUILTBAG community into a political corner, and cut away the American people’s rights in his traditional as-long-as-I-have-voters manner?

Or maybe I just couldn’t resist that metaphor? The mysteries of the universe abound.

As a summary, Christine O’Donnell said that “a lot of the gay people online have been angry” at this. Mitt Romney showed his opposition with his usual commitment: “I have had the same view I've had since, well, since running for office.” Truly he is a man who knows his own character, who will not change his views just to appease the voters. Rick Santorum threw in his two cents with “the charade is now over, no doubt an attempt to galvanize his core hard left supporters in advance of the November election.” 

Don’t worry, though, because the Republican view has evolved! Five years ago, gay marriage “was a sin, an abomination, and an attack on my freedom”. After Obama’s announcement, it changed to “how could you try to pull in voters like that? What a horrible person you are. Let me dig up some dirt on your history and embellish it and publish it like it is real news.” Although that has always been the political-strategy-du-jour.

Obama’s administration did ask for donations after the announcement – and they got them. Plenty of people tweeted saying that they gave donations, and plenty of others latched onto this to say it was all a plot to change the polls in November, and that Obama was angling for donations. 

Source

Call me shallow, but if he follows through on his support, he can believe whatever he wants. I really couldn’t care less if he doesn’t believe it himself. He’s a politician. He’s a politician that, right now, is risking losing the vote in 28 states that have voted before to have marriage redefined in the Constitution as between a man and a woman. Look at the map, to the right. Everywhere that is red, he risks losing the vote in. The vote, to a politician? That means everything.

He is a politician that risked losing votes in order to do something that plenty of Americans, and people watching from the rest of the world, care about. Yes, it’s not changed anything yet. Yes, there is a serious possibility of him being voted out before he can try to change anything. Yes, he possibly did it because he knew he'd gain supporters. But he said it. It’s a start.

(If you’re interested, it’s 179 days until the election. That’s, what, nearly half a year? I’m fairly certain that this particular topic point will not be the deciding factor, unless the Republicans keep talking about it.)