Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...Lowenstein: Will Obama do his part?
When The Windy City Times revealed a week ago that President Barack Obama had supported marriage equality in the past—as recently as 1996, in a questionnaire he filled out for a gay newspaper, he wrote that he favored “legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages”—the story hardly made a ripple in the news.
Given Barack Obama’s publicly stated positions on issues of importance to the LGBT community, this relatively major shift in belief should be surprising. If he believed in equality in 1996, why does he now believe that LGBT Americans are not deserving of that equality? If his opinion has been consistent all along, why is he representing it differently now than he did when running for the State Senate in 1996?The reason his shift hasn’t made much of a splash is that despite his public declarations to the contrary, it is probable that Barack Obama has always believed in marriage equality. Most of us believe that Obama is the most progressive, most inclusive person to be elected President in our nation’s history, and expect he will usher in a period of social change. We assume that his carefully wrought position of favoring civil unions while clinging to the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman represents shrewd political calculation, rather than convoluted personal opinion. We trust that, despite his statements to the contrary, he will come through for us in the end.
With those assumptions firmly in place, the revelation from The Windy City Times is interesting, but not particularly shocking.
But those are big assumptions to make, and until the Times article reported Obama’s earlier beliefs this week, the assumptions weren’t based on anything like fact.
To the contrary, Barack Obama went out of his way during the campaign to argue that voters should take his promises and positions at face value. On several occasions, in fact, he asserted that no one should expect him to change his views after the election. He didn’t embrace viewpoints for political expediency and no one on the right—or left—should believe that he would shift in their direction after getting into office.
So why do we do it? Why do we hope—perhaps I should say I—why do I hope, even expect, that the future under President Obama will bring change for the better?
For one, he will unquestionably be the most progressive President to lead our country. The positions he’s articulated on any number of issues—but particularly those of most importance to the LGBT community—demonstrate how far we’ve come as a country. On November 5th, we elected a man who supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. He supports federal hate crimes legislation. He supports adoption rights for LGBT Americans, and federal benefits for same-sex couples. He supports the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (in fact, Obama Communications Director Robert Gibbs confirmed that support just last week), and the Defense of Marriage Act.
Positions like those are encouraging. They show Barack Obama acknowledges the inequality that the LGBT community still faces and wants to work to address it.
But positions aren’t policy, and promises aren’t always fulfilled.
So while my hope for the Obama administration comes from the potential for change, it is tempered by the realities of history. When Bill Clinton was elected in 1992, the LGBT community was similarly excited; Clinton was the first President to mention gay Americans during his campaign but the hopes of many went unfulfilled.
In order to keep Obama’s promises, his positions, and his potential from being squandered in the same way, the LGBT community needs to step up, and be willing to hold him accountable for what we demand and deserve.
Over the summer, when Obama faced criticism over his vote on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, he took to the internet to address his critics, and said, “I learned long ago, when working as an organizer on the South Side of Chicago, that when citizens join their voices together, they can hold their leaders accountable. I’m not exempt from that. I’m certainly not perfect, and expect to be held accountable too.”
And then last week, besieged by angry supporters over his decision to include Rick Warren at his swearing-in, Barack Obama invited Gene Robinson to deliver the invocation at the Inaugural Opening Ceremonies. It’s a smaller gig, to be sure, and the campaign maintains the invitations weren’t connected. But much like I believe that Obama’s position on marriage isn’t necessarily truthful, I believe that his inclusion of Bishop Robinson was indeed a response to criticism.
But I don’t think that’s a bad thing, although the campaign is certainly trying its best to avoid that implication.
It doesn’t look like caving to me, or political pandering. It looks like a man who’s willing to be held accountable by his constituents, by his supporters.
And that gives me hope, hope that if we do our part—continuing to fight, and demanding equality—Barack Obama will do his.
Jenna Lowenstein works in New Media at Media Matters for America.
The man just got in. This is his first full day as US Preisdent. My attitude is let’s see what he actually does and then judge him on actual done deeds during his time as our 44th US President.
Newsom is gay?
Oh, so Clinton is for gay rights, while Obama isn’t? So if you march in gay pride parades and have your picture taken with gays you are okay? Even if your policies are sort of weak?
Listen I have no issues with Clinton, but it amuses me to no end that people actually think there is a difference between Clinton and Obama when it comes to gay rights. Or any policy matter.
Sincerely,
James
I think it’s far too early to pass judgment on whether Obama will be good for the gays. He’s barely been in office for a day. Right now, we should be hopeful, but we need to keep the pressure on. Write letters and make phone calls, not just to Obama, but also to Congress. Let them know that we do not want them to back-burner our civil rights.
We need to keep up the pressure; however, it really comes down to Pres. Obama. He may choose to do very little and be a 2 term president or role the dice to really make change in this country. If he has courage he will choose the latter. He has an opportunity.
HA!HA!HA! I read some of the comments. I’m kind of in line with Michael. We (GLBT) are silly to think that we are going to be included in any type of change for the better. The “old school”
political policies are so huge, no one in 8 years nor 4 will be able to change it. We are so, so far behind our European counterparts in so many ways. I don’t think in one term or two anyone could sway the politico factos that remain here. We will see no change to a public healthcare system, no change in our rights as GLBT citizens of this country. We will be used and trampled over and not thought twice about just as we have in the recent past during the inauguration and the transition. We’re going to be at the back of the bus because everything will come up more important than us. It will not matter how much lobbying, how much we come out to our neighbors and how much we demonstrate for our civil rights. We’re not like “them”. “They’re” never going to treat us as equals. I try to remain positive and effect change but it seems to fall flat even in my circle of influence. It seems like someone has to remain a second class citizen or religious zealots just can’t be happy!
Yes, James, Hillary has said that. Thanks for pointing that out. On the other hand, Hillary has marched in a gay pride parade (Obama hasn’t). She is also not shy about having her picture taken with gay people (Obama snubbed Newsom). She also didn’t go on a Revivalist tour with Donnie McClurkin (I think you know who did.)
In short, all we’ve received from Obama is promises. Nothing more. His actions, however, speak volumes. Hillary’s actions also speak volumes, and in a good way, where it concerns our interests.
Jenna,
I find it intriguing that you believe Obama holds true to a position that he held 13 years ago, although he has proclaimed otherwise, yet you fail to mention that it has been less than a year since Obama said he would filibuster FISA. He certainly gave up that position quickly. Knowing that, you still believe he’ll promote a position he had 13 years ago?
Now, THAT’S what I call hope.
Isn’t Hillary against same sex marriage also?
Sincerely,
James
Can we just stop? He has slapped us all in the face. What is left to discuss? He didn’t even say the word gay yesterday… but mentioned muslims? He does not care. He is behaving like a smug rock star scientologist now. You all wanted this. Now you got it.
Hillary was the savior now we will all perish with this flip flop gay using nimrod.
It would be silly of us to trust in Obama. Here’s why: Barack Obama wants to be a two term president that ushers in an era of change. Change in the way government works, change in the way we provide social services and entitlements, change in the way that business and finance is regulated, and change in the way America conducts itself abroad. And the change he speaks of is momentous, reworking from the ground up kind of change. To do that you need political capital. Tons of it. You need coalition building and consensus building on an unprecedented level. A huge part of his strategy is to convince broad swaths of the country (ie the red states) that this type of change and liberalism is ‘patriotic’ and can be based upon ‘faith.’ It’s the faith part that trumps us. Always will.
Face it. A president who begins his term with a national day of prayer and prior to that an invocation with a christian fundamentalist has made a political calculation: One that puts religious conservatives well above gays and lesbians if only because he needs them more since there is more of them.
At the end of the day our agenda doesn’t stand a chance. We’ll be no better off (on issues of gay and lesbian equality) than we would have been under McCain or were under Bush. But maybe we just have to accept that. For the greater good.
When Obama talked about sacrifice and hard choices I guess that includes us. And possibly our civil rights. I railed against it for the last 6 months but now have pretty much given up. The tide against us is too strong. And it’s one thing to fight the leadership of a bush or mccain. It’s another to fight the leadership of a supposed ’supporter.’ It’s more demoralizing and emotionally draining for one. And in a practical sense makes us look like crazy people. Think about it: I wanted to yell yesterday (and judging from the scattered boos when warren started speaking/praying I’m guessing I wasn’t the only one) but how could I. Everyone was too wrapped up in the moment. Railing against barack obama would be tantamount to supporting bush. And now it means you are unpatriotic and anti-religious thanks to obama’s smart politics. Who can win that fight?!
It’s clear President Obama stands for separate and less than equal- civil marriage. They don’t work and our community is not asking for 2nd class status. It’s duplicitous that he claims to be a “fierce advocate” for equality. Not so fast. Policies and details matter.
I think his past beliefs about marriage don’t really matter. He’s not going to be any different than any other President we’ve had. They all make promises, and rarely fulfill them, often despite their best intentions. If anyone thinks we are going to be a priority during this time of economic crisis, they are sorely mistaken.
It might be the right thing to care about equality and justice all the time, but there are only so many hours in the day.
There will keep on being moments where we are forgotten, or overlooked by the Obama administration like they forgot to broadcast the bishop, they forgot to look into Rick Warren’s anti-gay background…etc.
I agree with most of this, I think it makes sense. And I felt as encouraged as you seem as recently as last week. The addition of Rev. Robinson to the Inaugural program seemed like a positive step (albeit a small one).
But the Obama team’s decision to keep his prayer off of the HBO broadcast felt very intentional and too calculated. It added insult to the injury of Rick Warren’s inclusion, and made me loose a lot of hope– what hope I hadn’t already lost.
This was an interesting weekend, and I think it said interesting things about what’s to come. I hope your hopefulness is closer to the truth than my weariness.
Thanks for sharing.
I think your point about accountability is really accurate. It seems, as you note, that Obama does really believe in equality and fairness, but he’s made some political calculations that have forced him to run to the middle. If we want him to stand up for the things we care about most, then we need to make it politically important for him to do so. He’s demonstrated that he responds to political pressure (not only from the LGBT community, but from many others), so let’s make sure we keep the pressure on him….
So let me get this–and pardon the expression–straight. You hope that Obama’s flip flip on gay marriage is part of a shrewd political calculation, and that deep inside he still holds to his 1996 position on legalizing gay marriage. In other words, you hope that when he says today that he opposes legalizing gay marriage, he’s not being truthful. So by saying that in the end, you “trust” he’ll come through for us, you’re basically saying that you trust he’s not trustworthy. That makes no sense.