"Obama refuses to endorse same-sex marriage" – that was the Washington Times' headline over an Associated Press report on President Obama's June 29 White House press conference.
The president's filibusterous responses continued to be fewer-favored among reporters who attended.
The AP reported:
"President Obama said Wednesday that there is a 'profound recognition' in the country that gays must be treated like every other American. Yet days after New York state legalized same-sex marriage, the president refused to endorse such unions himself.
"Mr. Obama praised the New York decision as 'a good thing,' saying that 'what you saw was the people of New York having a debate, talking through these issues. It was contentious, it was emotional, but ultimately, they made a decision to recognize civil marriages. And I think that's exactly how things should work.'
TRENDING: Snake handler
"The president also uttered forceful words in support of gay equality, but without advancing his own position – which he's described as 'evolving' – in support of civil unions but not gay marriage.
"'I'll keep on giving you the same answer until I give you a different one. All right? And that won't be today,' Mr. Obama said when pressed on his views at a White House news conference."
Let me note that this surely suggested that Obama's full views on this very controversial issue will come forth only after – and if – he is re-elected in 16 months.
The AP went on to quote the president as saying:
"'I think what you're seeing is a profound recognition on the part of the American people that gays and lesbians and transgender persons are our brothers, our sisters, our children, our cousins, our friends, our co-workers, and that they've got to be treated like every other American. And I think that principle will win out,' Mr. Obama said."
That presidential announcement inevitably begs the question: If gays, lesbians and transsexuals are really "our brothers and sisters," why aren't polygamists and polyandrists also our brothers and sisters?
And if so, why did Obama fail to mention "our brothers and sisters" who are dedicated to multiple marriages?
Is there any medical evidence in existence that indicates polygamists and polyandrists have anything at all resembling the HIV/AIDS and syphilis rates of our nation's promiscuous homosexuals – so many of whom have died of AIDS and syphilis?
Moreover, if the president believes that gays, lesbians and transsexuals are "our brothers and sisters," why does he not also believe that "our brothers and sisters" include not only polygamists, but exhibitionists, the incestuous, coprophiliacs, necrophiliacs, urophiliacs and zoophiliacs (those who have sex with animals who are unable – or unwilling – to run away)?
None of these additional sexual orientations has the huge rate of HIV/AIDS and syphilis, which deadly diseases are distributed so widely by the nation's large number of sexually profligate homosexuals.
Their continued deadly-disease spreading was surely aided and abetted by Mr. Obama's announcement that they (with no distinction between the sexually profligate and other homosexuals) are "our brothers, our sisters, our children, our cousins, our friends, our co-workers."
Such presidential pandering to deadly-disease spreaders is surely a despicable means of trying to attract votes by an incumbent who will apparently do anything to try to win re-election.