2012 Election | Barack Obama | Gay Marriage | Mitt Romney | News

'New York Times' Backs Barack Obama And His Equal Rights Fight, Too

NYTimesThe New York Times' editorial board "enthusiastically endorse" President Obama's reelection efforts.

In addition to approving of his handling of the economy, foreign fairs and maintaining a fair, balanced Supreme Court, the paper gives a thumbs up to Obama's work toward LGBT equality. Mitt Romney's archaic policies are less-than-admirable, the paper says:

The extraordinary fact of Mr. Obama’s 2008 election did not usher in a new post-racial era. In fact, the steady undercurrent of racism in national politics is truly disturbing. Mr. Obama, however, has reversed Bush administration policies that chipped away at minorities’ voting rights and has fought laws, like the ones in Arizona, that seek to turn undocumented immigrants into a class of criminals.

The military’s odious “don’t ask, don’t tell” rule was finally legislated out of existence, under the Obama administration’s leadership. There are still big hurdles to equality to be brought down, including the Defense of Marriage Act, the outrageous federal law that undermines the rights of gay men and lesbians, even in states that recognize those rights.

Though it took Mr. Obama some time to do it, he overcame his hesitation about same-sex marriage and declared his support. That support has helped spur marriage-equality movements around the country. His Justice Department has also stopped defending the Defense of Marriage Act against constitutional challenges.

Mr. Romney opposes same-sex marriage and supports the federal act, which not only denies federal benefits and recognition to same-sex couples but allows states to ignore marriages made in other states. His campaign declared that Mr. Romney would not object if states also banned adoption by same-sex couples and restricted their rights to hospital visitation and other privileges.

This endorsement comes as no surprise, but it's always nice to see arguments laid out so neatly.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. @ TIM NC - my non-law-school education may be showing here, but my understanding of 'heightened scrutiny,' if applied by SCOTUS (even on these Section 3 cases), is that all discriminatory, anti-gay marriage amendments would hang in question.

    From the article linked below:

    "If Jacobs’ reasoning is adopted by the Supreme Court, it will be a sweeping victory for gay rights, likely causing state discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation to be virtually eliminated. And the fact that this decision came from such a conservative judge makes it all the more likely that DOMA will ultimately be struck down by the Supreme Court."


    If rational basis is applied, then yes, only Section 3 dies and federal bennies are granted to those who are lucky enough to be married in 21st century states.

    Heightened scrutiny from this Supreme Court would be tough. We have 4, but 5 or 6 would be a challenge.

    Posted by: kp05 | Oct 28, 2012 11:05:30 AM

  2. Bill P: Do you really think your cut-and-paste nonsense sways anyone here? And, no, we have no intention of "sitting out" the election.

    Posted by: Ernie | Oct 28, 2012 11:18:05 AM

  3. @KP05

    I suppose it is possible for the court to make a decision about a question that is NOT before it. But, I doubt it would happen. If that were going to happen, then why didn't the lower court judge who applied heightened scrutiny strike down ALL parts of DOMA instead of just Section 3?

    What I think people are suggesting is that if heightened scrutiny is applied to the Section 3 case, then it would pave the way for new cases being filed to strike down the other sections of DOMA. That is why we are seeing language like "more likely that DOMA will be ultimately struck down", "ultimately" meaning through a future case against the other sections.

    Posted by: Tim NC | Oct 28, 2012 11:19:16 AM

  4. @ Jason - If Romney wins, you will deserve EVERYTHING that does to hurt Gays. Unfortunately, the rest of us will have to suffer along with you.

    Posted by: Jerry6 | Oct 28, 2012 12:02:00 PM

  5. @Jason: Think SCOTUS when you vote. Romney appointees could eventually repeal a whole megilla of rights and protections for regular people over the next 30 - 40 years they could be on the court. That's one issue the Religious Right is vociferously campaigning for.

    Posted by: Diogenes Arktos | Oct 28, 2012 12:39:04 PM

  6. @ Jason,

    From your comment: "The New York Times neglects to mention that Obama and his Democrats had a majority in Congress but failed to end DOMA or enact ENDA."

    Jason, you are still on that Mormon planet, Kolob. Back here on earth, Congress *did* pass a bill that ended DOMA back in December of 2010, and Obama signed the bill into law. I hope you and the other pro-Romney queer commenters don't think you'll impress your Tea Party parents with your antics. They'll still punch you in the mouth and throw you out of their house during the holidays. Your Tea Party parents will always hate your queer ass, so don't bother trying to "fool" gay voters into voting Romney or third party. Nice try, but you lose.

    Posted by: Artie_in_Lauderdale | Oct 28, 2012 2:14:12 PM

  7. « 1 2

Post a comment


« «News: Sandy, Frank Lloyd Wright, Rubio, Peek-A-Boo« «