The 2012 campaign for President of the United States of America is heating up. However, neither of the two major political parties has yet officially nominated their respective candidate. None-the-less, it does appear that the Democratic Party will nominate incumbent President Barack Obama, and that the Republican Party, i.e. GOP, will nominate Mitt Romney.
President Obama is viewed by many as a liberal, some people even allege that he is a Socialist or a Communist. And then there are the zealous, self-righteous, self-appointed religious experts who incorrectly proclaim that President Obama is a Muslim, his Christian church membership and attendance notwithstanding.
Some people (read that to include me) see Mitt Romney as a rogue conservative who fluctuates on the issues given the situation of the moment, as a billionaire who could not care less about low and moderate income Americans or the middle class, and as a Mormon who worships three different and distinct entities while concurrently professing to be Christian.
These two individuals, Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama, have recently addressed the issue of same-sex marriage; and, that subject has now been injected into the 2012 Presidential campaign, and done so wrongly, in my opinion. Gay marriage is now all over the news. But, why??? Since when does the President of the United States have the authority to make public policy concerning the issue of marriage? And, why should the government, any level of government, even be involved in the personal and domestic topic of marriage?
Mitt Romney has gone on the record with this statement:
"I disagree with the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts. Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman. I will support an amendment to the Massachusetts constitution to make that expressly clear."
Hey, don't take my word for it; you can see and read that Mitt Romney statement and more for yourself in the web page Romney position on Same Sex Issues. And yet, Mr. Romney claims his perspective on the issue is not religiously based. You can read that for yourself, also. Just click over to The Washington Post Election 2012 Blog to read Romney: Gay marriage stance was ‘not a religious decision’
Meanwhile, many individuals and the news media are incorrectly stating that President Obama is "in support of gay marriage" - or perhaps I should say that it is my belief that the wording being used is incorrect and misleading. The wording is in many news stories like the following, for example:
Obama's gay marriage endorsement could sway state battles, by Dan Springer, published May 14, 2012, FoxNews.com.
It is my perspective that the wording is incorrect and misleading; because, I view the approach by the President as one that concerns equal rights for individuals in determining their own personal domestic arrangements among consenting adults.
Who am I and who the hell are you to determine which adult should be able to wed which other adult??? It is none of my business; it is none of your damn business; and, it damn well should not be the business of any freaking government!!!
Whatever happened to the perspective held by many Republicans, by many Conservatives, and by many, many members of the Tea Party Movement that individual rights are sacrosanct and that there should be limited government? OR, do they apply that value only as it relates to their own strongly held beliefs?
I put forth that this whole brouhaha over same-sex marriage, or as some may call it, gay marriage, is nothing but a prejudicial, discriminatory smoke screen to deny people equal rights under the law.
Oh, and by the way, I really believe that all marriages should be gay, as in happy.