Just look at the Google News search results…no one is reporting on this Obama-blunder except Christian sites.
Here is what he said:
“I don’t think it [a same-sex union] should be called marriage, but I think that it is a legal right that they should have that is recognized by the state,” said Obama. “If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans.” (Hear audio from WTAP-TV)
Unfortunately for Americans, but even more unbecoming of a presidential candidate, Obama did not expound on how exactly, the Sermon on the Mount justifies his views. The only possible options are the Golden Rule: “Do to others what you would have them do to you.” Or this: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.” Either way, he’s way out of context. And as a side note, the passage in Romans is not “obscure.” No scripture is obscure. Just because it isn’t as popular as John 3:16 doesn’t mean it can be left out to fit our personal views. And more importantly, that isn’t the only passage that speaks against homosexuality. But Obama would know that if he knew the correct context of the Sermon on the Mount.
The key question is, why did the media give him a pass? It could be because most of the media are as biblically illiterate as Obama is. Or, they could simply give him a pass because they agree with him. Or could it be that the media might have sensed this would blow up in his face if people found out and tried to sweep it under the rug?
How about a combination of all three. That’s what we can easily decipher looking at the only mainstream media search result, an article from the (more liberal) Washington Post:
Obama restated his opposition to gay marriage, but asserted that he supported civil unions because “people who are gay and lesbian should be treated with diginity (sic) and respect and the state should not discriminate against them.” He added, “If people find that controversial, than I would just refer them to the “Sermon on the Mount.”
Yup, biblical illiteracy and advocates of special rights for homosexuals at the same time for sure. Heck, the WaPo editors probably regret allowing that ‘He added…’ line to stay in the article…probably should have just taken that out. Too late, busted.
Flashback to December, just before Christmas. Huckabee released an ad wishing viewers a Merry Christmas. But the media jumped on it and even discovered a “floating cross” on a bookshelf in the ad and accused Huckabee of intentional, overt religious appeal. And yet here is Obama, citing a biblical passage in the context of a major moral issue in which he is utterly out of context on and the media ignores it. Should we expect anything less?