Photo courtesy of iStockphoto
It would be difficult to overstate the historical significance of President Barack Obama’s personal and very public affirmation Wednesday that people should be free to marry whom they choose, regardless of sexual orientation.
For the first time, a sitting president of the United States of America — the nation founded on the self-evident truth of the equality of all people — expressed his belief that it is not right for government to discriminate against two people seeking to unite in legal matrimony simply because they happen to be of the same gender.
It is not right, but it is the law in most of the country. Until Tuesday, 38 states had enshrined in their state constitutions a prohibition on marriage between couples of the same sex. It’s now 39, courtesy of 61 percent of North Carolina voters participating in a statewide election on Tuesday.
Twenty-five of those states, go the extra mile and also have state statutes prohibiting same-sex marriages.
It wasn’t until the 20th century that the U.S. Supreme Court (in the 1967 case Loving v. Virginia) struck down the last remaining 19th-century race-based marriage discrimination laws and state constitution provisions in the United States.
On Wednesday, Fox News Channel anchor Shepard Smith suggested that Obama’s same-sex marriage comments actually were behind the times. “The president of the United States,” Smith said, “now in the 21st century.”
Smith then wondered if Republicans really wanted to position themselves “on the wrong side of history” by making this a campaign issue, especially considering all the other problems confronting the nation.
Smith’s points are well taken. It’s undeniably true that the president’s comments represent a historic milestone. But it’s hard to believe that same-sex marriage will be a key issue in the 2012 elections. Not when millions of Americans and their families are still struggling to recover from the Great Recession of 2007-08. Not when health care still devours nearly 17 percent of the nation’s economic activity. Not when young people are increasingly priced out of decent higher education or forced into crippling educational debt. Not when environmental protection is under furious assault by well-funded industry interests. Not when the nation faces daunting challenges in Afghanistan, Iran, the Middle East, China, Russia and the European Union.
We fervently hope that the campaigns of this year’s crop of candidates, up to and including Obama and Republican Mitt Romney, will focus on the issues of overriding importance to all Americans. But playing on people’s fears, misunderstandings and prejudices has long been a staple of political campaigns, and the realm of sexual orientation has always lent itself to demagoguery and plain meanness.
Given the apparently unlimited amounts of money gushing into campaigns via super-PACs and other special interest groups, no doubt some candidates, campaign strategists and media gurus will see some advantage in exploiting a social issue controversy that is becoming less and less controversial with each passing day.
We hope for discipline, focus, restraint and well-ordered priorities from the candidates. But we shall not hold our breath.
REPRINTED FROM THE ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
