Home > A1, Learning > “Which side should I support?”

“Which side should I support?”


Should I support gay marriage or oppose it?  This is a question that President Obama has had to ask himself recently in the 2012 Presidential election.  President Obama has been on the fence for the past few weeks until recently claiming he supports gay marriage, but his behavior makes me question whether his personal beliefs made the decision or whether his party’s beliefs did.  Vice President Joe Biden had been known for supporting gay marriage while his president was somewhat neutral about the subject.  The question that keeps re-occurring to me is; why did President Obama suddenly choose a side and how did he make his decision in such a short period of time?

Our study of parties and political outlooks this unit has helped me to answer this question.  I choose to be independent meaning I don’t affiliate with either party.  Like President Obama, I have not taken a side to the gay marriage battle and I simply don’t care to because it isn’t as important to me and my life as other issues that are being debated.  I think President Obama may share the same beliefs as I do, but running for re-election requires him to take a side.  His choice to support gay marriage has been argued to have been influenced by Vice President Biden, the homosexual liberal community, etc., but I believe it was his party’s values that chose his mind for him.  Learning about judicial philosophies in Government this past week has helped me understand how presidents choose sides on an issue they seem to be indifferent about.  This past week, I had to read, compare, and contrast the two main competing judicial philosophies: flexible interpretation and original intent.  Flexible interpretation means the members of the judicial system honor the Constitution in a more flexible way while original intent is when the member honor the Constitution word-for-word.  Although his decision had no relevance to the judicial system, the democratic party has an almost entirely liberal outlook which means flexible interpretation is used more often.  Conservatives argue a man marring a man or a woman marring a woman are unconstitutional, but the democrats use flexible interpretation to make what they feel is the correct choice is today’s context and community.

President Barack Obama may have chosen the way he did for publicity or for votes, but I believe he chose the way he did to honor his party’s beliefs rather than his own.  I was able to come to this conclusion from our studies of the judicial branch and how they make their decisions according to their interpretation of constitution.  President Obama is using his party’s method of interpretation to choose what would attract more democrats and liberals to his beliefs gaining him more support.  Also by following his party’s values, he gains support from the large homosexual community in America.  Because of our judicial unit, I see why President Obama has used the liberal judicial form of making choices to make his own choices in the 2012 Presidential Election.

  1. May 15, 2012 at 7:48 am

    Interesting, but there’s a basic misconception. The “homosexual liberal community” doesn’t care about gay marriage either. The sector that cares is the conservative homosexual community who wants to be assimilated into conventional bourgeois society.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: