Comparing gay marriage to incest and pedophilia

Recently the staff of an elected official defended DOMA by citing Catalano v. Catalano, a marriage in Italy between an uncle and niece, and Wilkins v. Zelichowski, a marriage of a 16-year-old girl that was held as invalid in NJ. John Aravosis, a liberal blogger was obviously angered and shocked by the comparison: "Holy cow, [they] invoked incest and people marrying children.”

The politician was of course the right-wing extremist ... Barack Obama?

During the campaign, candidate Obama told the gay and lesbian rights group the Human Rights Campaign it was his "strong belief that the government has to treat all citizens equally. I come from that, in part, out of personal experience. When you're a black guy named Barack Obama, you know what it's like to be on the outside. And so my concern is continually to make sure that the rights that are conferred by the state are equal for all people. That's why I opposed DOMA in 2006 when I ran for the United States Senate.”

Now President Obama's Administration has defended the reversal by citing DOMA as established law, insisting that their hands are tied until Congress does something. Department of Justice spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said that President Obama “has said he wants to see a legislative repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act because it prevents LGBT couples from being granted equal rights and benefits," she said. "However, until Congress passes legislation repealing the law, the administration will continue to defend the statute when it is challenged in the justice system."

If the Obama Administration wants to defend the statute, they are more than welcome to do so, but they are not required to. From Hot Air:

Back in 2000, a little-known law passed in 1968 that purported to override the Warren Court’s “Miranda warnings” was challenged before the Supreme Court. Clinton’s DOJ actually sided with the criminal in arguing that the Miranda case was based on the Fifth Amendment and therefore the statute was unconstitutional; the Supremes had to invite a law professor unconnected to the case to defend the statute at oral arguments. (The DOJ/criminal dynamic duo won.)

So since taking office President Obama has defended both Don't Ask, Don't Tell and DOMA in the courts without being required to do so and (so far at least) passed on the opportunity to nominate the first homosexual to the Supreme Court.

The evil, cynical conservative in me thinks that Obama is not quite as "Hope-n-Change" as he made himself out to be and shockingly he is just like any other politician - saying whatever it takes to get elected and then once elected doing whatever it takes to get reelected. It's almost like Obama just told all the different liberal groups what they wanted to hear in order to get their vote. But it couldn't be that ... could it?