Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Thursday, October 27, 2016

For honoring his conscience on the issue of marriage equality, President Obama earned angry rebukes from all quarters on the right, including the Uncle Toms of the Log Cabin Republicans, who said he was “a day late and a dollar short”; teenage mom Bristol Palin, who mocked him for invoking his daughters in changing “thousands of years of thinking about marriage”; and 50 year-old virgin Ann Coulter, often engaged but never wed, who called his decision “a sign of desperation.”

On the Fox Nation website, minions of Roger Ailes accused Obama of declaring “war on marriage,” echoing Rush Limbaugh‘s charge that “the president of the United States is going to lead a war on traditional marriage,” while Karl Rove simply gloated that the controversy has left him “in a bad place” with Catholic and conservative voters.

All of these reflexive attacks were consistent with Republican propaganda shrieking that matrimonial rights for gay people will destroy the institution they hope to uphold. It is a puzzling argument, especially because the principal right-wing complaint against homosexuals for so many years was their alleged promiscuity. Now gays and lesbians are charged with trying to ruin the family because they want to take vows of fidelity.

In this historic moment for human rights, listening to the likes of Ailes (now on his third marriage) and Limbaugh (currently married to wife number four), not to mention Rove (divorced twice), it is impossible to believe that Republicans screaming about the future of wedlock are sincere. If they are truly worried about marriage, they should stop harassing gays and campaign for the only change that might make a real difference.

They could outlaw divorce, or least repeal the ultra-liberal, no-fault divorce laws that they’ve used to their own advantage.

Across America — and particularly in the red states that have rejected gay marriage — divorce rates are continually rising, along with teen pregnancies, out-of-wedlock births, and single motherhood (which somehow afflict  gay-friendly blue states far less). Gay rights obviously isn’t the cause of marital strife and separation in those places where hostility to same-sex relationships is considered a religious duty. To achieve their professed goal of protecting marriage, shouldn’t the divorce addicts of the Republican right renounce their sins and return to the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Old Testament, which forbid divorce except under a few very restricted circumstances?

Of course such a return to bygone moral standards would severely inconvenience for men like the hypocrites named above — along with Rupert Murdoch,Newt Gingrich, and a very large proportion of the GOP Congressional caucus — and will therefore never occur. Restricting divorce wouldn’t be  good social policy anyway. Yet it is worth noting that the most enraged defenders of the traditional, heterosexual conjugal bond are men who have repeatedly trashed their own marriages.

Why should Limbaugh and his ilk deny gays and lesbians a chance at wedded bliss? Can they possibly set a worse example, after all, than he did?


Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2012 The National Memo

  • Nothing like truth…

  • SaneJane

    “Divorce addicts”, good description. I will use this again and again.

  • SharonConway

    do republicans ever listen to themselves? do as i say, not as i do? no-one’s gay marriage is going to hurt anyone else’s marriage. it amazes me that people who cheat on their spouses have so much to say about other people’s lives. i have gay friends who have been together over twenty years. this country was not founded on religion, regardless of how much the tea baggers lie and twist in the wind.

    • kelley stephens

      Hey if its good enough for the president, then its good enough for everyone else right? He does more saying than doing.

      • johninPCFL

        Other than not firing gay advisors and staying married to his FIRST wife, right? That kind of DOING?

      • deebastet

        What do you mean by, He does more saying than doing?

      • Jon

        Fact is YOU are not obligated in any way to marry a gay, so0.. What’s the problem? Don’t tell me you just can’t seem to mind your own business. Right now, saying more than doing is rampant on all sides.. Haven’t you been around long enough to recall that this is how it’s done during an election year? I’ve been around enough to know that no one in politics does any significant work during an election year because their focus is to win the election.. Anyway, if you look hard enough you will notice that congress is still using their power to bog progression down by failing to pass bills and/or passing controversial bills that can and will damage the people if the President doesn’t veto which in turn irritates Congress even more.

      • yes beacuse everything he puts before the idiot GOP THEY VOTE IT DOWN

    • I have a gay sister who, in August of this year, will celebrate 35 years with her partner. Using sperm donors, she gave birth to 1 child and her partner gave birth twice. They raised three beautiful children to be productive, college educated adults who all happen to be heterosexual. I also have a brother who has been married 4 times, and is now living with another victim. He has 5 children with 3 of his ex-wives. He hasn’t seen 3 of these children in more than 20 years, although the rest of our family sees them often. One of his other children is in prison for drug issues, and his youngest lives with his mom and refuses to have anything to do with his dad, although the child is close to myself and the rest of our family. Clearly being heterosexual is not all it takes to me “married!”

      • Olivier Francis

        Can anyone here explain why a civil union between two individuals be called Marriage. This is a term that has been in use since the first human being to denote a certain relationship.
        I am not opposed to everyone being treated fairly and with dignity. I do not want to be concerned with what goes on in peoples bedrooms. But I do not understand why this community wants to hijack yet another word and impose that on the majority.
        Just like the word “gay”.

        • Olivier, the term “Marriage” is a legal term, and without it, same sex people do not have the same rights as “Civil Union” people, also “marriage” is not a religious term, and it seems that religious folks have hijacked marriage only for hetrosexauls. The word marriage is not only for a specific people, and who is being hijacked?

  • Love it, “Divorce Addicts,” all of those complaining are in multiple marriages and they want to preserve marriage???? What Hypocrits!!!!! I love the part where they complain about gays being promiscuious and then upset because they want to take a vow of fidelity, you can’t have it both ways!!!! And all these people who are the supposed republican leaders, what great examples; Rush on 4th marriage, Rove divorced twice (I can see why), Gingrich on his third marriage, come on like the sanctimonious bas***ds they are, THEY SHOULD JUST SHUT UP!!!!!!

  • Ed

    Debbie- They should but they won’t

  • majong13

    You’ve got to admit, the Republicans have given us a great many belly laughs this year. What really destroys marriage is divorce! And cheating! And trying to dominate women, which by the way, gentlemen, does not fly anymore! You know, women could really run this country better, we should vote all the men out. And all the people who are bitching that “Obama is against marriage”. He’s the only one with a healthy marriage. What a joke!

  • does anyone care what Bristol Palin thinks?

    • metrognome3830


  • Typical “Do as I say,not as I do…”,attitudes. They feel they can tell others to be moral, all the while running amock like a drunken sailor…OH, that couldn’t be, because most never served America, and are CHICKENHAWKS…

  • howa4x

    You left out Guliani who cheated on his wife and left her while she had cancer, and the religious right hails him as a defender of faith. Donald Trump who conservatives love traded his wife in for a newer model. The democrats do it to, just watch the Edwards trial, but we expect it from them so it’s never a suprise. You know how those liberal are. You also left out Former Rep. Mark Foley(R) Fla. who had a thing for the young male pages, and all those tele-vangelis who were caught with prostitudes or getting massages from gay men. All defenders of family values Republican style.

    The most interesting thing is that Obama is the real symbol of fidelity and family values. His love for his family is always on display, and has been accused by the press corps of being aloof for not attending Georgetown parties. The reson being he wants to spend his limited free time with his children. The only problem is he is a black man, and evangelicals only recognize white republican men as being capable of having real family values .

  • My god, is Ann Coulter REALLY A VIRGIN? If so, we now all know what her problem is, she needs a good d–king!

  • My favorite is Anne Colter the 50 year old virgin….yeh right?!

    • Did you look at her NECK,sure looking good.

  • Melvin Chatman

    Christians should be “DOERS” of the WORD, and, NOT just HEARers of the WORD only!!

  • Missy270

    isn’t guys like Rush Limbaugh gay themselves? Remember the bad old days of Roy Cohen who led a crusade against gays. Afte’t he died, news was unearthed that HE was a closet queen. Talk about the pot called the kettle black. The world is changeing…and a lot faster than we like to think. Bozo’s like Romney will never catch up with the times. Anyway he has his own problems of gay bashing. Oh thats right, he can’t remember that ever happening

    • All kinds of studies show that some of the most anti-gay activists are themselves gay? Strange?

  • Bubbadave

    It’s the old double standard… ‘Don’t do as I do, do as I say!’ I don’t have any problem with same sex marriage. Hell, let them be as ‘happy’ as the Republican Right…. They have to be ecstatic with all of their marriages.

  • JohnnyE1000

    Yup, the institution of marriage was in trouble way before the idea of gay marriage was getting some traction.

  • Well said, wasn’t it Jesus who said not to judge others unless you have walked in their shoes? I may be wrong about who said it, but it is a good philosophy. What I have noticed throughout my life-time is some people have the tendency to criticize others when their behaviors mirror their own. It’s a hypocritical behavior that is seems common in the far right. I have no comment on why they do it and will let the psychologists figure that one out. I just find it rather comical and often wonder where they find the nerve to say the things they do?

  • bstockinger

    In general politicians are hypocrites. They can’t legislate morality because they aren’t moral.

  • Just more of the republitards trying to have it both ways. No wonder they like little mittey so much. Mittey shows them all how to be for, against and someplace uncharted in between at all times. mittey has more positions on everything than my ex who had multiple personality disorder.

  • 03howard47

    God, The Amighty Father of All Creation, loves us so much that He sent His Son JESUS from heaven to die for the sins of the whole world. Why? Because we, the world, need to be saved. The wages of sin is death or forever separation from God. What separates us from God? Sin! So what is the issue that we must make a decision? Accept Jesus!!! Jesus is perfect and has no sin! Accept Jesus! When we accept Jesus, we accept His Word which defines marriage and every thing else. When we accept Jesus we preserve everything that his word preserves. When we accept Jesus, God calls us righteous. However, when we do not accept Jesus, God calls us wicked. Isaiah 57:2 says that the righteous will enter into peace and find rest as we lie in death. But Isaiah 57: 20-21 says, “But the wicked are like the tossing sea, which cannot rest, whose waves cast up mire and mud. “There is no peace,” says my God, “for the wicked.” In conclusion, Accept Jesus!!!!

  • I like the concept of “Divorce Addicts”. Let’s go a step further to sanctify the rite of marriage. Let’s stop the flow of sexual relations before marriage. As the Bible says, let the Harlot (unmarried woman having illicit sexual relationships outside the sanctity of the marriage bobnd) be stoned. Oh wait let’s enact it and we can stone Krystal Palin as our first Harlot contestant.

  • 03howard47

    The only way we can preserve marriage is to accept God and His Word which are essentially the same. And how do we know that our marriage and our lives are of God? By reading, studying, and obeying the Bible, God’s Word. God’s Word gives us assurance of what’s right and what’s wrong. God will change our lives as we learn His Word and apply it to our lives step-by-step.

  • The article didn’t even mention that these hypocritical protectors of the sanctity of marriage chief icon Ronald Reagan was also a divorcee

  • I am not gay, but the personal preferences of marriage, does not involve strangers. I am not the kind of person that would let that be a problem to me, either. There are more important matters that the right wing republicans need to repair. Examples: money laundering, fraud and greed (white-coller) and blue-coller crime. The major problem exists when, republicans offset their greed by means of frivilous lobbying; and, getting into personal affairs of the middleclass and poor. The marriage partner preferences should remain between the Lord and marriage partners– not mankind. Stay out of personal affairs that do not involve you! This would do you good. It is known, that people who meddle into other people’s life–do not have a life of their own. Also, try and make descisions for complete strangers. These laws that are changing everyday. They are intended for making the middleclass and poor have to pay out money. Goverment, should make more laws that make the wealthy criminals have to pay back. Don’t you think, that if the budget is to be fixed sooner, that the justice system could retrieve more money from guilty white-collar criminals? Makes sense to me:)

  • JLC38C2


    • You must be old! Hey JLC this is 2012! If you are religious you can believe anything you want! You live in America and would never say you don’t have a right to believe what you want! Unfortunately, our government got into the marriage business! When that happened our Constitution came into the picture. The Constitution says everyone is to be treated as an equal! Then the government began to make special privileges for people who marry each other, make a vow to each other. When that happens any people who make that vow should have the same privileges! That is the issue here! I ask you as a fellow American to grant me the right to believe as I do also, without trying to make laws to take away my civil rights, the same that you have! Sir it is called fairness and that is what makes the USA unique!

  • The fact that this article has Newt Gingrich’s face upfront is a joke!

  • joyscarbo

    The political debate about same sex marriage should not be a debate at all. This is strictly a human rights issue. The Declaration of Independence assures that ALL PEOPLE are created equal and that we all have the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To not allow same sex couples to marry is denying gay people of their rights!! Shouldn’t these ideals and rights be at the forefront of this so-called debate?

    This is not a religious issue although republicans and the right keep bringing religion into this issue. To allow legal marriage of same sex couples does not mean that churches must allow gays into their congregations, perform wedding ceremonies. There is NO LAW that could force churches to change their basic belief systems about homosexuals, as it would be in direct violation of the Constitution’s 1st Amendment, which assures that the government may not interfere with religion. (FYI: There are many churches in my state that welcome homosexual members.)

    There is too much mixing of politics and religion. Before 1964, interracial marriage was illegal. Beliefs that lead to deny interracial marriage was largely based upon religious belief. In 1964, the Supreme court found that denying intrracial couples the right to marry was unconstitutional. This sweeping legislation made it illegal in every state to discriminate against interacial couples who wished to marry. The same sex marriage is just another facet of the same issue. Individual states should NOT decide this issue. The Supreme Court must continue it’s stance on protecting the basic human rights of all citizens, regardless of sexual orientation. This decision would settle this political battle for good.

    • johninPCFL

      Well said.

  • jebediah123

    You know, when I read articles like this (that illuminate Republican hypocricy) I can only say—I LOVE THIS NATIONAL MEMO!!!!!

  • Sanctitiy of marriage! What a laugh! With 50% of all marriages ending in divorce, there IS NO sanctity of marriage, and the more money a man has, the quicker his mind is outside of the marriage vow circle. I wonder what might be found in romney’s closet if one had unlimited money and time to dig. Many of the Mormons still practice multiple wives, whether or not is’t supposed to be against the law.

    Multiple husbands now, that has possibilities! Especially since men have trouble being well-rounded in ways other than the beer-belly! (Sorry guys, couldn’t resist!)

    • The excuse Mormons use for multiple marriages in their history is that so many of their men were killed and there were so many women without husbands so this problem understandably would make sense! What would they do with all those frustrated and horny females around? Ah, let men, who can handle it, have multiple wives! Notice we have no record of any women having more than one husband.

      Interestingly, their missionary system is only for young men. During the time they are on a mission, no masturbation, no dating, no sex! So if there are so many horny young men around what do you do? I will let you draw your own conclusion!

  • I was slightly bemused by Gingrich’s comment that fascism has decided to impose its views on society. I can’t work this out. A measure is being proposed that would extend civil rights to people other than Mr. Gingrich himself and now something, I’m not really clear what, is being imposed on him and the rest of society? The logic of this escapes me totally. And what fascism has to do with it is a complete mystery to me.

  • dsbrown50

    The homophobes like to bring up the Bible and why only heterosexuals are good people. People used to be stoned for being different and slavery was okay. But we came a long way since those days of discrimination. They also think that homosexuals are contagious and that the courts will run out of marriage licenses for straight couples. And the multiple divorces the homophobes have, they don’t have much respect for the institution of marriage.

  • Jon

    I’m not (particularly) interested in the gay situation but I (as usual) will honor the majority vote. I don’t however understand how this will destroy conventional marriage.. A man and a woman will still have the right to marry and now so shall the gays.. The city should see it as an increase in revenue in that now not only can they ‘charge’ a man and wife to indulge in holy matrimony but they can hold their hand out just a little further for more profit and if the marriage institution is so fragile as to succumb to another group then it was weak to begin with. Bible thumpers, remember.. It is not for you to judge but to serve your God with humility.. Have you so easily forgotten?

  • NEWT GINGRICH telling us how to save our marriages, oh my gosh. newt U IDFIOT HOW MANY TIMES U N=BEEN MARRIED- ur as BAD as the DONALD- CALISTA keep looking over ur shoulder, NEWT may already have filed to divorce u

  • thank u SHARON,very well said

  • NEWT u are the kettle calling the pot black–get a life—–poor CALISTA


  • well they need to castrate NEWT then he will be safe for CALISTA

  • probably her parents

  • it would split her in half

  • they are all perverts brother screwin ssister dad doing daughter their motta is incest is best

  • they are all republicans so they dont post my comments

  • Limbaugh is on wife number four. Doesn’t that make him Muslim?

  • All these right-wingers hating gay people they don’t know. In North Carolina marriage equality has been banned but it was the state where John Edwards dallied with his mistress. One man, one woman, one mistress. Way to go, Tarheels!