Saturday, May 12, 2012
Steelman: Obama cheapened institution of marriage; it's one man, one woman
This week, President Obama set a new low in political opportunism. He has avoided taking a clear position on same-sex marriage in an effort to not alienate those who believe in the traditional definition marriage. However, this issue is just too important to his liberal base, so he announced on Wednesday that his thinking on the matter has "evolved" and that be believes same-sex couples should be allowed to marry.
As with many issues, President Obama has changed his position over the years as it is needed for political posturing. To see how President Obama has allowed political posturing to affect his beliefs, click here to view his flip-flops on this issue.
I was not shocked when I heard the President's remarks, but I was saddened that he sought to cheapen the institution of marriage by bringing it into his re-election campaign. It is abundantly clear that this President seeks to divide Americans not just on the basis of income, gender and race, but also by their deeply held religious and moral beliefs.
He clearly hasn't been keeping up with the news: to date, 32 states have passed language protecting the traditional definition of marriage.
I promise you that my position on this issue is crystal clear and unwavering: I do not support same-sex marriage. As a State Senator, I sponsored and fought hard for the legislation that put the issue on the ballot defining marriage as being between one man and one woman, and Missourians voted overwhelmingly to add this definition to our Constitution.
I believed that this position was right at the time, and I still believe it today.
I hope to represent all Missourians, and I know that there is a range of views on every issue, even among those who agree. However, while I will always listen to all viewpoints and welcome debate on the issues, my view of marriage will never change. I will always fight to protect the definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman.