Share This Article with a Friend!

Obama Invents Phony Right, Attacks Constitutional Rights

     “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages…

Barack Obama, February 1996

     “What I believe is that marriage is between a man and a woman…

Barack Obama, October 2004

At a certain point, I've just concluded that for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married…

Barack Obama, May 2012 

President Obama’s “evolving” stand on the issue of same sex marriage, an evolution that led him from his original position favoring same sex marriage, to one opposing it and then back to his original support for this new “right” is a classic example of liberal “say whatever it takes to get elected” hypocrisy.

That liberals will say whatever it takes to get elected and Obama will pander to liberal homosexual pressure groups is no surprise, nor dangerous in and of itself.

What is dangerous is Obama’s penchant for finding new “rights” that have no basis in the Constitution, while actively attacking the rights clearly articulated in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Obama’s willingness to attack the First Amendment freedom of religion of those who oppose abortion, his EPA’s regular trampling of property rights, and his invention of the right to medical care in Obamacare show that the rights Obama and his liberal allies invent to get elected all come with a strong mandate for federal government coercion and the end of freedom of conscience.

Now that Obama has come out in favor of same sex marriage, his attack on the freedom of conscience of military chaplains who oppose same sex marriage and his refusal to defend laws that prohibit the recognition of same sex marriage is starting to look more and more like the first step toward a federal mandate for the recognition of same sex marriage.

This of course would throw the First Amendment and the Tenth Amendment out the window.

As Obama and his liberal allies create phony new “rights” to secure votes from liberal pressure groups, they are actively attacking and undermining the fundamental rights the Constitution was intended to protect – such as freedom of religion and property rights.  In their eagerness to create new “rights” and obtain the votes of the homosexual lobby, Obama and his liberal allies are set to once again ignore the Constitution as the “law that governs government,” and that is the real danger in Obama’s embrace of same sex marriage.

Share this

Same sex Obama

Obama is a Muslim. He is not patriotic, simply because he is not a natural born citizen of the United States. (so he is not qulified to be POTUS) He is probably Bi sexual since he has appointed over 150 homosexuals to his administration. There are no "Radical Muslims". The non radical Muslims simply are those who do not follow the whole Koran, or who are waiting for the 12th Imam to crawl out of his hole before they become "radical", then if they live next door to you, slit your throat!      Democrats & Republicans....Those who are hoping that God does not exist, and those who hope He does exist or know that He does! One more thing Muslims are commanded by their "god" to LIE to all of us INFIDELS !....Has he ever spoken the truth about anything?????????

Maybe There Is Hope, But Not His Kind

In my humble opinion, this is one of the most idiotic political moves that I could think of.  A couple more of these blunders, and Mitt Romney might become competitive in the swing states.  Just think if Santorum were the nominee in waiting.  He would have blistered Obama, immediately, and effectively.

Once again, Ron Paul is right.

Why did we ever allow marriage to be changed from a "church-sanctioned covenant" and replaced by a "state-issued license" in the first place? This is where the problems began. The states nor the feds have any jurisdiction over God's law and should not be in the business of licensing, sanctioning or acknowledging who is married or not, period.

Any free people have the right to enter into any association they like and call it whatever they want. However if you expect a true Bible-believing church to call it marriage it better be one man and one woman.

We must address the underlying problem


All of the Left's invention of these new "rights" stems from the Supreme Court's illegitimate expansion of its power by reading the "privacy" doctrine into the hopelessly vague first section of the 14th amendment.  By amending the 14th amendment to restore its original meaning as a ban on governmental race discrimination, we can solve all of these constitutional abuses.  In order to promote amendments to the Constitution to restore its original meaning and structure, the first step is to put through an amendment to the amendment process itself which will eliminate the unnecessary convention now required by Article V and permit States to directly initiate amendment proposals.  This will break the current de facto federal congressional and judicial monopoly on interpreting the Constitution, and empower grassroots patriots on the state level to restore the Constitution by amendment.  See

Constitutional Rights

Respectfully, RIchard, I see a problem with your stance here.

The Constitution doesn't list my rights; it lists the powers we individuals have ceded to a federal government. I have the right, paraphrasing P.J. O'Rourke, to do anything I damn well please. Seeing no power in the Constitution relating to personal relationships, the 10th Amendment controls.

It's a bad idea to turn the Constitution on its' head just because it's a "hot-button" issue, as homosexuality clearly is.

At the state level, I think North Carolina - and others - have created a Gollum. With a vote to ban gay marriage and civil unions, what North Carolina has done is to acknowledge a power of government to regulate the sacraments of the church. This will end badly.

gay marriage

Dangfitz, that is a good point, but then aren't you making the same mistake? The Tenth Amendment says that powers not granted to the United States are reserved to the States and the People. The People of the state of North Carolina exercised that right. And it is not meddling with the religious institutions of marriage, but with the legality of marriage, clearly the secular aspects of it. A Church is still free to issue a marriage ban for gay couples if they so please, but the state is simply refusing to recognize it as a legally binding thing. This was done with polygamy and the Mormons, after all, and nobody objected because it was seen as a fundamental right of the states.

Doubtless the Left will try to use this to their advantage, the way they pervert everything they find, but I don't think one can argue against the fundamental principle here. And it was necessary to establish this, lest Mr. Obama come along and usurp the authority to force gay marriage through the power of the central government.