America's "First Gay President" Abuses the Bible and Misuses the Civil Rights Movement

America's "First Gay President" wrongfuily used the Bible to support legalizing same-sex marriage, and minutes after passing the traditional marriage amendment, North Carolina politicians called "shameful" the mandate of their own electorate.
Commentary by Dr. Michael Brown

The battle over same-sex marriage has been all the rage over the last several days.

First it was Vice President Joe Biden declaring that “‘Will and Grace’ probably did more to educate the American public than almost anything anybody’s ever done so far.” Next was the decisive passage of the marriage amendment in North Carolina, enshrining a ban on same-sex marriage in the state constitution, then it was President Obama announcing his support for same-sex marriage, after which Newsweek declared Obama to be “The First Gay President.”

Underlying the events of the last week are three important subplots: first, the cultural snobbery of the liberal elite, who equate opposition to same-sex marriage with backwoods bigotry; second, the canard that gay is the new black; and third, the president’s specious appeal to Jesus Christ and biblical principles to back his support for same-sex marriage (although Obama previously appealed to Jesus Christ and biblical principles to back his opposition to same-sex marriage).

In North Carolina, within minutes of the announcement that Amendment One would pass, the obviously embarrassed and embittered editors of the Charlotte Observer announced that “North Carolina foolishly and shamefully joined 30 states with constitutional bans on same-sex marriages,” stating that, “The [voting] result doesn’t show love. It’s wrong and disgraceful.”

North Carolina Governor Perdue was so upset that she told a reporter, “Folks are saying what in the world is going on in North Carolina? We look like Mississippi.” And a gay journalist commented, “Those who live in the intelligent parts of North Carolina voted overwhelmingly against Amendment One, but unfortunately, there just aren’t enough intelligent parts of North Carolina.”

Surely only backwoods bigots would be so foolish as to think that marriage should be what it has been for 6,000 years of recorded history. Surely only unintelligent people – like the people of Mississippi? – would argue that kids deserve a mom and a dad or that two moms do not equal a mom and a dad.

Indeed, the unceasing mantra, beat like a drum by the media, is that gay marriage is a civil right and that gay is the new black, which is why the Observer stated that the marriage amendment “unwisely writes discrimination into the state constitution,” and that North Carolina “is on the wrong side of history on this matter.” And that’s why President Obama could tell 3,000 attendees at a major gay activist fundraising event that it was wrong to counsel them to be patient, just as it was wrong to counsel “patience to African Americans petitioning for equal rights half a century ago.”

But it is misguided to compare gay activism to the civil rights movement, just as it is misguided to compare romantic attraction and sexual behavior to skin color. Really now, how can desire and behavior be compared to skin color?

Skin color is also innate and immutable, while, in contrast, there is no reputable science that demonstrates that anyone is born gay and there are countless testimonies of those who have experienced a modification, if not a radical change, in their sexual and romantic desires. And despite the painful fact that many gays and lesbians have been bullied as children and mistreated as adults, they are not being brutally kidnapped and sold into slavery, they are not being lynched, they do not have to sit at the back of the bus, and they do not have to drink from “gay only” drinking fountains. To the contrary, gays and lesbians are some of the most prominent, influential, and beloved people in our society.

But President Obama also pointed to the Scriptures in support of legalizing same-sex marriage, explaining last week that, “The thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf, but it’s also the golden rule — you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated.”

How in the world does one get from “Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf,” to the radical redefinition of marriage, a redefinition that is in fundamental conflict with every single reference to marriage in the entire Bible? How does the crucifixion of Christ legitimize two men having sex? As for treating others the way we want to be treated, based on the president’s logic, we would have no possible grounds for opposing the consensual behavior of any other parties, be they polygamists or sadomasochists.

Obama was on far more solid, scriptural ground when he stated in 2004 (be it for political purposes or sincerely), “My religious faith dictates marriage is between a man and a woman, gay marriage is not a civil right,” and again in 2008, “I believe marriage is the union between a man and a woman. As a Christian it’s also a sacred union.” (Jesus was unequivocal on this; see Matthew 19:4-6.)

It looks like those “backwoods bigots” had it right after all.

Michael Brown ( ) is the host of the nationally syndicated, daily talk radio program, The Line of Fire, author of A Queer Thing Happened to America and 20 other books, and director of the Coalition of Conscience.
Source:Special Guests
Email:*** Email Verified
Tags:America's First Gay President, Barack Obama, Newsweek, North Carolina, Marriage Amendment, Politics, News, Opinion
Industry:Education, Media, Religion
Location:United States
Account Email Address Verified     Account Phone Number Verified     Disclaimer     Report Abuse

Like PRLog?
Click to Share