Same sex marriage supporters in political circles lead to the inevitable question: Do they support it because they are closet homosexuals and want to put forth that agenda as a "spectator" rather than a participant? Do they know a homosexual they support and want to change laws to help them personally, even if the public is against it? Or do they have other motives for supporting a cause they say they don't personally belong to?
One thing is for certain on the issue: They have to have some motive to support such a controversial topic that divides public opinion--and it has to be worth that effort.
For President Obama, he came out on record today as saying he supports the same-sex marriage cause because he "thought civil unions would be sufficient," according to Fox News, but the homosexual community isn't satisfied with that.
No one thought they would be, as they wanted same-sex marriage approval all along. And Obama denied them that because he wanted the moderate voters to elect him into office in 2008.
Now, when he knows the financial support of the gay movement is at risk if he doesn't embrace their cause, he comes out in favor of same-sex marriage. Everyone knew he would.
Another politician in favor of same-sex marriage, however, supports the homosexual agenda because he is one.
Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank is that man. And according to TPM, Frank not only supports same-sex marriage; he plans to marry his own homosexual partner in his state, which supports marriage between two men.
Whether the president, House Rep. Barney Frank or other male politicians support same-sex marriage for their own personal agendas--or the financial largess it might bring their political aspirations, the fact remains that some politicians do support it publicly.
Will that cost them the vote of the Americans who oppose same-sex marriage? Obama and Barney Frank don't seem to think so. But Americans might not want to ask John Travolta right now what he thinks about same-sex marriage, who is, himself, being labeled a homosexual.