By Zack Ford
At a press conference Tuesday afternoon, White House press secretary Jay Carney responded to a question about First Lady Michelle Obama’s comments at various campaign stops yesterday defending same-sex couples right to “love whomever they choose.”
Stopping short of indicating support for marriage equality, Carney explained that her comments referred to the President’s opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act:
CARNEY: She has said this before and has for some time, and that is a reference to the president’s position on the Defense of Marriage Act. The president and first lady firmly believe that gay and lesbian Americans and their families deserve legal protections and the ability to thrive just like any family does.
The first lady has said she is proud of his accomplishments, including the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ ensuring hospital visitation rights and calling for the repeal of DOMA and obviously our actions on DOMA. And our decision not to defend DOMA is well known.
The only kind of legal protection that would allow same-sex families “to thrive just like any family does” is marriage, so this comment represents perhaps the closest the Obama administration has come to openly supporting marriage equality.
As Greg Sargent pointed out today in the Washington Post, the first lady’s rehtoric “was just vague enough to again underscore the confusion that surrounds the White House’s position on this issue,” and Carney’s response only accentuates that confusion. Nevertheless, without a full-throated endorsement, the President presumably continues to “evolve” on whether he personally supports legalizing same-sex marriage.
At campaign fundraisers for her husband’s re-election, the First Lady on Monday emphasized that the Supreme Court justices the President could appoint in a second term could help protect the equal rights of LGBT people:
MICHELLE OBAMA: [L]et us not forget about what it meant when my husband appointed those two magnificent Supreme Court justices. And for the first time in history, our daughters and our sons watched three women take their seat on our nation’s highest court.
And let us not forget what their decisions — the impact those decisions will have on our lives for decades to come -– on our privacy and security, on whether we can speak freely, worship openly, and, yes, love whomever we choose. But that’s what’s at stake. That’s the choice that we face.
Related articles:
Filed under: National Headlines
Florida teen fighting criminal charges related to same-sex relationship
Harvey: Gays deserve to be fired for displaying their lifestyles to everyone
Anti-gay marriage activist commits suicide on alter at Notre Dame cathedral
Bryan Fischer: The Boy Scouts are now the ‘Boy Sodomizers of America’
Candidate for Va. Lt. Governor warns same-sex marriage leads to bestiality
ACLU, attorney condemn prosecution of teen who had sex with minor girlfriend
Sex and the teenage girl: The Kaitlyn Hunt tragedy
UPDATED: Police call fatal New York City shooting an anti-gay hate crime
Transgender student skips graduation rather than wear female gown
Attorney implies suspect’s child sexual abuse was a factor NYC killing
Iowa anti-gay activist explains his opposition to gay marriage: ‘It’s awful’
Lesbian teen charged in relationship with underage girlfriend rejects plea deal
Details emerge in case against teen accused of lewd behavior with girlfriend
BREAKING: French president signs marriage equality bill into law
BREAKING: Boy Scouts of America votes to rescind policy banning openly gay scouts
and where is the amendment???
the Obamama’s can say whatever they want too – they refuse to get involved in LGBTQ rights saying “its up to the states” – I dont care they are democrats and Im gay -they still suck!
Amen to that!
actually the obama’s have done more for gay rights then any other president ever…
the Obama’s have only reversed something YOUR liberal President Clinton put into effect years ago…the president the gays supported and drooled over…he ran on the equal rights platform and did NOTHING for gays. The Obama’s are spending an exorbitant amount of money protecting people in foreign lands, when this country needs the jobs and money here first and foremost. HE has repetitively said he does NOT support gays, Susan Thames is absoutely right! Good Lord, you’re for liberal B.S. and you have no idea what else liberal laws do!!! It’s time gays got their heads out of the sand and realize this president does NOT have our best interest at heart…and the other 95% of what he’s doing in office is ruining this country…are the gays soooo freaking selfish that we have to stand behind someone who’s ruining this country and talking out of both sides of his mouth, just to get votes? Really? Progress people, progress…and if California of all places cannot even get gay marriage to pass and stay passed for very long, this tells me it’s not the liberals doing the voting…get a clue
doesnt matter what he really says all anyone is trying to do it make themselves look better for the upcoming election so that they can get votes from more than one minority. if he really cared enough about the gay community things would be alot different. all this is for anyone is a show. we need to stand as one and get our voice out.
thats just my opinion.
Now all she has to do is talk Barak into it
It’s about time
He put DADT in effect because it was better than the dishonorable discharge LGBT soldiers were getting before that. Its unreasonable to think that a president can just go into office and say “Ok everybody gays from this point on have all the same rights and protections we do” It doesnt work that way. If they cant get it thru the senate or house then whats the point? , so lets take steps. Obamas realistic in first getting re-elected then in his final term stand up to the gay marriage laws and disrimination laws. I believe this is the strategy and am hopeful that the community will come out in droves on election day to make sure that Obama (the only choice in our favor) does win, so we will have a chance. Ifyou cant make change by charging head on then sneak around the back, do what you have to , to have change for our community in this decade
President Clinton did not have a choice to do anything better than DADT. He wanted to allow gay people to serve openly in the military, but the Congress would not allow him to do that. DADT was better than what the previous law before him had been, so he ended up having to choose to do that instead. The old law was worse. He softened it as much as the Congress allowed him to.
And Tricia… that was for you… your post made it sound as if Clinton put a new regulation against gay people into effect. He did not. Before DADT, it was allowed for people to out other people in the military, force them to say they are gay, and then drum them out. DADT was actually better than that. The intent was that you weren’t allowed to try to force people to say they were gay anymore, so as to discharge them for being gay. No, it wasn’t great, but it was, in fact, better than what existed previously.