The Fine Print

An unsuspecting daytime talk show was interrupted this afternoon by President Obama, who announced in a hastily-arranged ABC interview that “same sex marriage should be legal.” And the internet went wild. The announcement, a risky play in an election year, marked another step in the president’s “evolution” on the subject. It’s a risk that the White House seemed unprepared to take until spurred into action by our delightfully gaffe-prone veep.  While the political situation surrounding the announcement may make it seem rather contrived, most marriage equality supporters welcomed the president’s comments with starry-eyed euphoria.

But let’s read the fine print. What he actually said was that he thinks gays should be able to get married, but not that they have the right to get married. It may seem like a trivial distinction, but not when you consider that U.S. democracy runs on federalism, and Obama still supports the concept of states deciding on their own. That may sound good conceptually speaking, but how about when a state like North Carolina actually bans same-sex marriage (not to mention other forms of gay partnerships, such as civil unions) as it did yesterday? Does the president back that? As gay activist Dan Savage puts it, “The president supports same-sex marriage while also supporting the right of states to ban the same-sex marriages that he supports.” In a brilliant political maneuver, Obama gets a huge pat on the back from the left and can, when he needs to in the campaign, retreat behind the “states’ rights” argument — the star witness for historical inequality in this country.

Equality should not be a state issue kind of like how slavery should not, and now is not, a state issue. You know what would have been a more courageous endorsement? Something like, “I believe the equal protection clause of the constitution guarantees all people the same rights. That includes same-sex marriage.” As it stands now, Obama does not publicly think North Carolina’s new amendment is unconstitutional. He just personally thinks gays should be able to get married. That doesn’t really heal the wounds of many devastated North Carolinians today.

Throughout his career, the president’s position on gay marriage has “evolved” in a convenient manner. Is it any surprise that his “endorsement” of marriage equality should be any less politically convenient? His words were no accident. This is his personal opinion. Yes, I’m overjoyed just like everyone else, but somehow the whole thing just didn’t feel nearly as gutsy as I had hoped.

I don’t mean to diminish what should be a happy occasion. It’s not everyday that a sitting U.S. president even personally endorses same-sex marriage. It’s only today actually. There is no denying that this is a step in the right direction, but it isn’t even close to the last step. I believe the president will eventually further evolve on his states’ rights opinion because I don’t think he even believes it (just like I don’t think he was ever really opposed to gay marriage in the first place).

Here is the president’s opportunity to use his bully pulpit in positively advancing the discourse over same-sex marriage. It’s my hope that this is the start of something real — something that can eventually become bona fide policy action — and not some politically calculated culmination of his own personal evolution.