Homophobe Barack "World" Obama and Homophobe Rick Warren: Birds of a Feather?

I am coming to agree with Rush Limbaugh: We are living, in the United States as we approach 2009, in a sitcom (ready to turn into a tragedy).


What is Barack "World" Obama's official position on "gay marriage". He is against it, in case you had neglected to notice. His position is basically the same as super Pastor Rick Warren. It is really the same as John McCain (as on so many other things: Why do you think McCain lost?).


However, I told you that Obama's position is a fraud, and I am right on that. Obama, like so many in the Democratic Party (and, like McCain, in the Republican Party, to which I no longer have any allegiance at all), simply does not want to take the heat for going against the thousands of years of total human history (where polygamy and incestual marriage have sometimes--often, in the case of polygamy--been sanctioned, but never homosexual marriage), and the heat (more importantly) of going against a majority of the American people. Therefore, Democrats want judges to do it for them.


Obama well knows that he fully intends to appoint judges who will eventually declare homosexual marriage the law of the land, as the California judges did for California. Thus, Obama is willing to say he is against gay marriage, while at the same time refusing to come out against the California judges, or for the Constitutional Amendment in California to restore democracy (in which leftists do not believe). Yes, again, this is just like John McCain, who refused to support a Federal Constitutional Amendment on marriage, despite knowing that judges would eventually start sanctioning gay marriage, in a subversion of democracy. Did I telly you McCain was a fraud, as well? Sure I did. That is why I did not support him for President, despite Sarah Palin.


The sitcom part of this is that most gay activists understood fully the fraud, and supported Barack "World" Obama for President. They assumed that he said what he did aobut gay marriage as a fraud, just as I said in this blog. Isn't it interesting that "gay activists" and this blog both agreed that Obama was a liar and a fraud.


To digress (as religion and gay marriage are not directly connected--else I, an agnostic, would not oppose gay marriage), I also said in this blog that the evidence is that Obama does not believe in religion or faith either, despite what he said in his books and to Pastor Warren (in that joint forum with McCain). It is impossible, of course, for me to see into Obama's heart, but I stated in this blog that I don't believe anyone who truly believes in religion could say what Obama said in San Francisco ("clinging to their guns and religion"). I stand by that statement. It is true of most leftists. Nancy Pelosi has admitted it. See my previous blog entry quoting her saying that she does not believe God meant for her to give up her own "mind" (lol, in Pelosi's case), and could not agree with the Catholic position on abortion. While that is essentially my position on faith, it shows Pelosi (as most leftists) to be an absolute hypocrite and/or someone too dumb to even understand religion (where all goodness is supposed to come from God, and you are supposed to subordinate your own will to God). I vote, in Pelosi's case, for both explanations. Even more than I, Obama, Pelosi, and most leftists expect God to agree with the, and not the other way around. Thus, they are mostly hypocritical frauds on religion, and issues involving religious views.


"Gay activists" know this. Otherwise they would never have supported Obama in the first place (besides, of course, generally being leftists on all issues). McCain and Obama did not differ on the issue (publicly, or even--I firmly believe--in their private fraud). Gay activists expected the Democratic Party to continue to tacitly support gay marriage, while refusing generally to come out directly for it.


Enter Obama and Pastor Warren. Obama chose Warren to give the Inaugural invocation. A more meaningless function you could never imagine. However, gay activists blame Warren for the passage of Proposition 8 in California, which neither Obama nor McCain (frauds that they are) publicly supported (much less actively). Suddenly gay activists have turned this into a "controversy", with the leftist mainstream media making a big deal about it (in a different--sympathetic--way than they would have if Christian groups had objected to the chocie of person giving the invocation). The mainstream media, of course, assumes that you are not enlightened if you truly oppose gay marriage. Yes, the mainstream media does believe Obama is a fraud and a liar when he said he is against gay marriage. They firmly believe that Obama is a kindred spirit to them, and fully intends for gay marriage to eventually be the law of the land.


So why the protest by gay activists? Do they not understand this is just politics, as they clearly did during the campaign? Are we really living in a sitcom, where nothing makes sense? Yes and no. We are truly living in a sitcom, as illustrated by the new intelligentsia idea that gay marriage is revealed truth, but you have to understand gay activists.


Gay activists do not care about marriage. What gay activists want is societal approval (yes, I said "approval", and not "tolerance"). They want to trash anyone standing in the way of that approval. Plus, they want political power and notice. This Rick Warren incident is all about notice and power. Knowing that the mainstream media is on their side, gay activists are just using it as an excuse to push their agenda--the "global warming" tactic of simply claiming that their side is the only "enlightened" side. I guarantee you that gay activists still expect Obama to be on their side, in the end. They just don't want to give anyone the idea that a person like Rick Warren can get away with opposing them, without paying a price. As stated, in fact, even that is not the main thing going on here. Gay activists want to grab every opportunity to push their agenda of societal approval of the gay lifestyle, and this was one such opportunity.


Homosexual conduct is conduct. No one has to do it (nope, the idea that sexual satisfaction is one of the guarantees of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution is false). Marriage has always been between a man and a woman. The assertion that this should not be the case is not just an attack on the concept of marriage, as known throughout human history. It is an attack on civilization itself.


In the sitcom in which we now live, where black is white, this is simply irrelevant.


P.S. The title, of course, is meant to be sarcastic. "homophobe" is one of those meaningless words. What are you if you oppose polygamy or marriage between a brother and sister (both of which have been approved by soe human societies, with polygamy still being approved in some societies)?