The deal is that the SG's single most important responsibility is to defend the laws of the US in the Supreme Court. Period.

And, shannonlee above has it right. In terms of overall importance, this whole issue pales in comparison to the other crises Obama is facing. I'm sure that if I were gay and wanted to be married, I might not agree. But, from a high level perspective, if Obama doesn't get the economy and international relations under some level of control, there will be one term. Everything, including gay rights, will go down the toilet.

Please, a) research the SG's responsibility and, b) apply some perspective.

Homosexuality is not a fetish…it is a naturally occurring genetic tendency. We see it in birds, penguins and bonobo monkeys…a very close genetic relative to man.

I have to wonder what happened to you as a child for someone so liberal to be so purposely ignorant on gay issues.

It all depends on your perspective. His ideas about the wars going on, and about internal policies are adapting too since his “campaign promises” [really, if you hang your hat on those I bet you're one of those people who have a one-night stand with someone and expect a phone call the next day..lol]. Obama must change his ideas as he learns. If he didn't , he'd be an idiot.

At the start of this debate, very few people were aware of the food industry's [artificial insemination in livestock] findings on sexual preference as learned. Few people also noticed that GLBT purposefully didn't include other fetishes like polygamy, bestiality and object-gratification as also just as deserving of any other fetish outside of “one man and one woman”. Few people put together that just because some select people [of a much larger group] loosely share a behavioral rebellion against heterosexuailty, doesn't mean they are a viable minority, when otherwise their ranks cross all races, creeds, nationalities and gender. The debate is evolving, people are learning.

So naturally is Obama's policy.

No one should beat up gays, polygamists, lesbians, objectophiles, bisexuals or transexuals. Just like no one should beat up someone with OCD etc. But should we hold OCD as “normal human behavior” and hold it up as so to society? No, learned and fixated deviant behaviors must never be held as normal. If you cannot grasp why, in a matrix where humans are social learners, then it's time to go back to the books and study awhile.

It's really a shame to see Obama turn his back on the gay community, which was certainly a significant factor in getting him elected. I know for many in the community, it brings back painful memories of similar occurances during the beginning of the Clinton administration. During the campaign (in both cases), the candidate acted like he thought of gay people as people, worthy of equal rights. In the case of Obama, it was all about change and hope, yet now he clings to “tradition”. The legal brief was just rotten with conservative talking points. That's not hope and change, that's hopelessness because of more of the same.

Anyways, I wish that people in general would pay attention to their terms. “Traditional Marriage” (I'm assuming heterosexual marriage for love) is a relatively recent phenomenon, reaching the US in the late 1700s and reaching Europe in the 1800s. Before then, marriage was essentially a business contract between the families involved, with husbands' families seeking wives with a large dowry from well-to-do families and wives' families seeking husbands who could provide for their daughters.

Marriage is still a business contract between individuals. It provides a rubric for property allocation and visitation rights and provides for power-of-attorney. Why should a state be able to not recognize a valid contract between consenting adults from another state?

Obama did nothing to help gays fight against Prop 8.
Obama is now more homophobic than Dick Cheney.