Connect with us

GOP, FOX, Religious Right Freak Out Over Obama Gay Marriage Support

Published

on

Republicans and the radical religious right wing have staged an all-too-expected freak out over the news today that President Obama now support same-sex marriage.

The headline at Fox News’ Fox Nation reads:

OBAMA FLIP FLOPS, DECLARES WAR ON MARRIAGE

which must have been too extreme for even Fox, because later they changed it to:

OBAMA FLIP FLOPS ON GAY MARRIAGE

Meanwhile, the “regular” Fox News site labeled the news “URGENT,” and ran anti-Obama stories under the main title.

Predictably, Brian Brown, NOM, the National Organization For Marriage, president’s statement gleefully includes: “God is the author of marriage, and we will not let an activist politician like Barack Obama who is beholden to gay marriage activists for campaign financing to turn marriage into something political that can be redefined according to presidential whim.”

“President Obama has now made the definition of marriage a defining issue in the presidential contest, especially in swing states like Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, Florida and Nevada. Voters in all these states, and over two dozen more, have adopted state constitutional amendments defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. President Obama says that although he personally supports gay marriage, he still supports the concept of states deciding the issue on their own. However, that is completely disingenuous. His administration is already trying to dismantle the nation’s marriage laws by refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court. All the state marriage amendments and laws are at risk under a president who actively wants to change the definition of marriage. NOM will work ceaselessly in these swing states and across the nation to preserve traditional marriage because it is profoundly in the public good to do so. God is the author of marriage, and we will not let an activist politician like Barack Obama who is beholden to gay marriage activists for campaign financing to turn marriage into something political that can be redefined according to presidential whim. The definition of marriage was already headed for the ballot in four states this fall; now it will be one of the defining issues of the presidential election. No state in this country has ever voted for gay marriage. Just yesterday North Carolina voters sent a clear message that America wants to preserve marriage. We intend to win the marriage debate this November.”

Calling Obama’s comments “a day late and a dollar short,” the gay Republican group, Log Cabin Republicans surprisingly came out with a very negative statement:

“That the president has chosen today, when LGBT Americans are mourning the passage of Amendment One, to finally speak up for marriage equality is offensive and callous,” said R. Clarke Cooper, Log Cabin Republicans Executive Director. “Log Cabin Republicans appreciate that President Obama has finally come in line with leaders like Vice President Dick Cheney on this issue, but LGBT Americans are right to be angry that this calculated announcement comes too late to be of any use to the people of North Carolina, or any of the other states that have addressed this issue on his watch. This administration has manipulated LGBT families for political gain as much as anybody, and after his campaign’s ridiculous contortions to deny support for marriage equality this week he does not deserve praise for an announcement that comes a day late and a dollar short.”

Eric Cantor’s spokesperson let his personal feelings known via Twitter:

With the economy in stagnation and crippling amounts of debt, the President seeks to further divide America by launching in a culture war.

and

once again the President refuses to put economy and jobs first. All of our focus should start there according to vast majority

and

Too bad the president doesn’t think a lot of other pressing issues should be handled by states instead of Federal govt.

AmericaBlog founder John Aravosis’s response:

Your culture war is my life.

And isn’t that the problem with so much that the modern Republican party stands for. They’ve turned all of our lives into one big culture war.

Access to affordable health care is a culture war.

Jobs are a culture war.

Protecting the environment is a culture war.

Student loans are a culture war.

Civil rights are a culture war.

What isn’t a culture war to these people?

Bryan Fischer, the public face of the certified anti-gay hate group, American Family Association, today via Twitter said:

Romney for natural marriage, Obama for unnatural marriage. For social conservatives, choice is now quite clear.

Peter LaBarbera, head of the anti-gay hate group Americans For Truth About Homosexuality wrote a lot on Twitter:

The Gay Hate Machine rages: how dare we challenge their “great moment” w/ Pres. Obama embracing perversion-based “marriage”!

Give me a break: the President is thrusting his Religious Left ideology (now inc. faux “marriage”) into our Democracy.

and this:

W/ his embrace of phony “gay marriage,” Obama outs himself as a soulless panderer w/ no core beliefs. He mocks his own Christian profession

Christian profession? What does that even mean?

Gay Tea Party group GOProud released this statement:

“It is good to see that after intense political pressure that President Obama has finally come around to the Dick Cheney position on marriage equality.  I am sure, however, the President’s newly discovered support for marriage is cold comfort to the gay couples in North Carolina.  The President waited until after North Carolina passed a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.”

“This is hardly a profile in courage by President Obama.  For years now, President Obama has tried his hardest to have it both ways on this issue.

“The real kudos here goes to LGBT activists and their allies who finally forced the President into yielding on this issue.”

Fellow anti-gay hate leader, FRC President Tony Perkins issued the following statement:

“The President’s announcement today that he supports legalizing same-sex marriage finally brings his words in sync with his actions. From opposing state marriage amendments to refusing to defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DoMA) to giving taxpayer funded marriage benefits to same-sex couples, the President has undermined the spirit if not the letter of the law.

“As demonstrated by yesterday’s overwhelming vote in North Carolina, redefining marriage remains outside the mainstream of American politics, especially in the critical battleground states and among minority voters. In North Carolina, the amendment received more than 60 percent of the vote in majority-black counties.

“Considering that ten of the sixteen battleground states have marriage amendments that could be overturned by the President’s new policy position on marriage, today’s announcement almost ensures that marriage will again be a major issue in the presidential election.

“The President has provided a clear contrast between him and his challenger Mitt Romney. Romney, who has signed a pledge to support a marriage protection amendment to the U.S. Constitution, may have been handed the key to social conservative support by President Obama.”

 

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Trump Posts Video From 1987 of Him Ranting About Taking Iran’s Oil

Published

20 hours ago

on

March 30, 2026

By

President Donald Trump on Sunday told the Financial Times he wants to take Iran’s oil. On Monday, he posted a video of him saying exactly that — in 1987.

“To be honest with you, my favorite thing is to take the oil in Iran, but some stupid people back in the U.S. say: ‘Why are you doing that?’ But they’re stupid people,” Trump told FT.

In the resurfaced 1987 clip posted to Truth Social, Trump says, “Why couldn’t we go in and take over some of their oil, which is along the sea?”

Asked by Barbara Walters how he would do it, Trump appeared to have few answers.

“You take their oil,” he said.

“How?” a frustrated Walters pressed.

“You’re gonna have a war by being weak,” Trump retorted.

“How do we go in? What do we do?” Walters, now exasperated, continued to ask.

“You’re going to have a war. And it’s going to start in the Middle East,” was Trump’s response. “The next time Iran attacks this country, go in and grab one of their big oil installations, and I mean, grab it and keep it, and get back your losses, because this country has lost plenty because of Iran.”

Trump reportedly is sending more troops to the Middle East, and preparing for a possible weeks-long ground invasion, The Washington Post reported.

Earlier on Monday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio was blasted after declaring that the U.S. has just four goals in the thirty-one day war in Iran — and three of them Trump has insisted are complete. As critics noted, they did not include securing Iran’s nuclear stockpile or opening the Strait of Hormuz.

Mediaite reported that the clip Trump posted had already gone viral on social media Sunday evening.

READ MORE: ‘Alarm Bells’ as Trump Turns to Civil War White Supremacists in SCOTUS Case

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Alarm Bells’ as Trump Turns to Civil War White Supremacists in SCOTUS Case

Published

22 hours ago

on

March 30, 2026

By

The Trump administration is turning to Civil War-era white supremacists in its challenge to a more than one century-old ruling, based on the 14th Amendment, that states that most children born in the United States are U.S. citizens.

Over a century ago, Confederate officer and Louisiana attorney Alexander Porter Morse “was among a trio of thinkers who spearheaded a failed effort — steeped in anti-Black and anti-Chinese racism — to erase birthright citizenship,” The Washington Post reported. “The Trump administration is reviving their arguments to make its case today, some legal scholars say.”

University of New Hampshire history professor Lucy Salyer told the Post “she was struck that the Trump administration had chosen to elevate those figures and their ideas.”

“If you know the history and the broader context of what they were trying to achieve,” Salyer said, “it does ring alarm bells.”

The Post adds that “Trump administration attorneys cite Morse in their Supreme Court brief to argue the disputed idea that commentators in the 19th century widely agreed that the Constitution ‘exclude[s] the children of foreigners transiently within the United States’ from qualifying for citizenship.”

President Trump is making clear exactly where he stands on the issue of birthright citizenship. On his first day back in office Trump signed an executive order attempting to limit birthright citizenship for certain U.S.-born children of undocumented or temporary-status parents.

On Monday, the president went even further.

READ MORE: Trump Promotes Chilling Iran War Op-Ed Warning of What Could Be Coming Next

“Birthright Citizenship is not about rich people from China, and the rest of the World, who want their children, and hundreds of thousands more, FOR PAY, to ridiculously become citizens of the United States of America,” the president wrote on Truth Social. “It is about the BABIES OF SLAVES!”

“Look at the dates of this long ago legislation – THE EXACT END OF THE CIVIL WAR!” he continued. “The World is getting rich selling citizenships to our Country, while at the same time laughing at how STUPID our U.S. Court System has become (TARIFFS!). ‘Dumb Judges and Justices will not a great Country make!'”

The Post notes that the ACLU calls the administration’s argument “nothing less than a remaking of our Nation’s constitutional foundations.” They say it would apply to tens of thousands of children born in the U.S. every month, and would be “devastating” to families around the country.

“But worse yet, the government’s baseless arguments — if accepted — would cast a shadow over the citizenship of millions upon millions of Americans, going back generations.”

According to the Post, the 1800s campaign against birthright citizenship also relied on prominent legal scholar Francis Wharton, who posited the idea that citizenship be granted to children of European immigrants but not to children of Chinese immigrants.

“Like Wharton, the Trump administration says in its brief a child’s citizenship is dependent on the parents’ nationality, not birth in the United States.”

The Trump administration, also like Wharton, “highlights the 14th Amendment phrase ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof ,’ saying it disqualifies children of illegal migrants and temporary visitors from becoming citizens because they can’t demonstrate the necessary political allegiance to the United States the phrase evokes.”

The case, which will consider the legality of Trump’s executive order, will be argued before the Supreme Court on Wednesday.

READ MORE: ‘Moving the Goalposts’: Rubio’s Iran War Defense Sparks Fierce Backlash

Image via Shutterstock

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Moving the Goalposts’: Rubio’s Iran War Defense Sparks Fierce Backlash

Published

1 day ago

on

March 30, 2026

By

President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio continue to appear at odds with each other’s messaging on Iran, as Secretary Rubio declared four “clear objectives” for the war — objectives Trump has said have already been met, with Rubio describing Iran’s new current leadership as possibly impermanent, while the president praises them.

On ABC News’ “Good Morning America,” Secretary Rubio on Monday said it is unclear if the current Iran regime will “end up being in charge,” according to the Wall Street Journal’s Alex Ward.

“We have to see [if] these people end up being the ones in charge, seeing if they’re the ones who have the power to deliver,” he said.

Also on Monday, President Trump announced that the U.S. “is in serious discussions with A NEW, AND MORE REASONABLE, REGIME to end our Military Operations in Iran. Great progress has been made but, if for any reason a deal is not shortly reached, which it probably will be, and if the Hormuz Strait is not immediately ‘Open for Business,’ we will conclude our lovely ‘stay’ in Iran by blowing up and completely obliterating all of their Electric Generating Plants, Oil Wells and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalinization plants!), which we have purposefully not yet ‘touched.'”

READ MORE: Trump Promotes Chilling Iran War Op-Ed Warning of What Could Be Coming Next

“Here are the clear objectives of the operation,” Rubio said, as the State Department posted. “You should write them down: 1. The destruction of Iran’s air force 2. The destruction of their navy 3. The severe diminishing of their missile launching capability 4. The destruction of their factories.”

Opening the Strait of Hormuz — which Trump demanded and critics note was open before Trump began his war thirty-one days ago, is not listed among the four objectives Rubio declared on Monday. Trump has stated previously that the first three have already been met — and he is reportedly preparing to send thousands more troops to the Middle East, possibly for a ground invasion.

Rubio’s stated objectives drew strong backlash.

READ MORE: ‘Blank Check’: Trump’s Board of Peace to Get $1.25 Billion From State Department

“Perhaps the reason Secretary Rubio is having trouble convincing people that these are the only objectives is that none of these goals require thousands of ground troops, which makes it curious why they are flowing into the region right now as I type this tweet,” noted associate professor of political science Christopher Clary.

“No mention of nuclear capabilities, vague language that leaves room for interpretation. Preparing the media space to declare victory and leave?” asked Institute for Military Operations Professor Olivier Schmitt.

“Always good to have clear objectives laid out one month after you start a war,” noted Eli Clifton of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

“Moving the goal posts isn’t the solution Mr. Secretary. What happened to nuclear weapons? Uranium enrichment? Support to proxies? Civilian rising up to challenge the regime? Reopening the Strait of Hormuz?” posited retired U.S. Army military intelligence officer Jon Sweet.

READ MORE: ‘Wrong Answer’: Conservative CPAC Audience Cheers Impeachment

 

Image via Reuters 

 

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.