Robert Gagnon, Ph.D., Author of the book the Bible and Homosexual Practicesays that President-elect Barack Obama’s interpretation of the Bible is a major source of influence on his liberal policies supporting homosexual affirming legislation. Consequently, in addition to thrice consulting with a controversial homosexual bishop, Obama quickly appointed a team of 7 openly gay power brokers to help him carry out his pledge to eliminate all “discrimination” against the homosexual community. Its the first and only team of “minorities” Obama has set in place.
Specifically, Dr. Gagnon says:
Obama wants to repeal the “abhorrent” , even though the Act’s main purpose is merely to prevent “ ” adopted in one state from being foisted on all other states. Even Hillary Clinton did not come out in opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act. “Unlike Senator Clinton, I support the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) – a position I have held since before arriving in the U.S. Senate. While some say we should repeal only part of the law, I believe we should get rid of that statute altogether.”, which he has called
Although his supporters have falsely claimed he doesnt support gay marriage, Obama strongly opposed California’s Proposition 8, which merely limits the definition of marriage to a “marriage between a man and a woman.” Its unclear how a Obama can be against gay marriage and at the same time strongly oppose legislation which simply defines marriage as what he claims he believes it is. What’s more Obama opposes any federal constitutional amendment to do similarly.
Dr. Gagnon argues that Obama’s public policy is specifically shaped by his errant biblical views which we believe he adopted as a 20 year disciple of neo-heretic Jeremiah Wright.
Obama claims that his advocacy for homosexual unions receiving full marriage benefits is in keeping with Jesus’ own views in the Sermon on the Mount and elsewhere. As an assertion about the Jesus of history or even about the living Christ (assuming significant continuity between the two), this claim is preposterous. It is nothing but a fantasy, a figment of Obama’s imagination imposed on the text of the Sermon.
Obama’s argument, carried to its logical but absurd conclusion, would force Americans to provide full marital benefits for adult-committed polygamous unions and incestuous unions, since such persons too deserve to have hospital-visitation privileges, health insurance coverage, and all the other benefits of marriage every bit as much (and more so) than homosexual unions.”
Obama’s opposition to any legislation to define marriage as a male-female institution is particularly strange because Obama supporters argue vociferously that religion should neverinfluence public policy or constitutional decisions. Yet, they glaringly exempt Obama from doing exactly that. Listen to Obama supporter and actor Ashton Kutcher make his case (below) against religious influence on public policy in regards to homosexual marriage.