Wednesday, May 16, 2012

NEWSWEEK: "The First Gay President"

The latest issue of Newsweek magazine is on the stands, featuring a picture of President Obama with a rainbow halo suspended over his head. The cover text simply says, "The First Gay President."


The feature article is written by Andrew Sullivan, an openly gay writer who describes himself as a "conservative political pundit." He is no conservative, most people see him as a very troubled individual who has been able to leverage his personal challenges into a career.



This past Sunday, Sullivan was featured on Chris Matthew's show on MSNBC, where he tearfully said among other things, “I am his equal,” and Obama's announcement was "a transformative moment." And, “To hear the president, who is in some ways a father figure, speak to that – the tears came down like with many people in our families.”

In a statement about the article Sullivan says, "When you step back a little and assess the record of Obama on gay rights, you see, in fact, that this is not an aberration. It was an inevitable culmination of three years of work."

Sullivan says, "He had to discover his black identity and then reconcile it with his white family, just as gays discover their homosexual identity and then reconcile it with their heterosexual family." A striking parallel in Sullivan's mind, that makes him the First Gay President.

Others see it differently.

The Atlantic said he may be our first, "Gay-Female-Hispanic-Asian-Jewish President."

They may be on to something, however, I think a lot of us wish he could have simply been an "American " President with the best interest of our country as a priority. That clearly did not happen. Instead, he has become a symbol of progressivism's poster president, a symbol of what diversity, in its most evolved state, can actually become. A hollow man.

The Newsweek article also says with certainty that his evolution on the matter of homosexual "marriage" was a calculation, not an evolution. A well staged and planned calculation. Others are confirming that, saying it was decided some months ago.

Rand Paul probably had the most interesting observation to the President's recent epiphany. While speaking at a convention in Iowa he said,

"The president recently weighed in on marriage. And, you know, he said his views were evolving on marriage. Call me cynical but I wasn’t sure that his views on marriage could get any gayer. Now it did kind of bother me, though, that he used the justification for it in a biblical reference. He said the biblical Golden Rule caused him to be for gay marriage."

"And I'm like: What version of the Bible is he reading? It’s not the King James version. It’s not the New American Standard. It’s not the New Revised version. I don’t know what version he is getting it from."

"Now that doesn’t mean we have to be harsh and mean and hate people," said Paul. "We understand sin and if we believe it’s sin we still understand that people sin. And we understand that we are not out there preaching some sort of hateful dogma against people. But that doesn’t mean that we have to go ahead and give up our traditions. We’ve got 6,000 years of tradition. There’s a lot of stability, even beyond religion, there’s stability in the family unit. Just from an anthropological point of view, the family is a really important thing. We shouldn’t just give up on it."

Indeed! And we will not give up on it, nor will we give up on the defense of marriage.

Thank you for standing with us in these historically challenging times. Your support is needed.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

1 comment:

  1. Obviously they've forgotten about James Buchanan.

    ReplyDelete

Faith & Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.