Gay marriages should be state issue

This week, as probably everyone already knows, President Obama announced that he supports gay marriage.

During the past few years, the president had been saying his stance on this issue was “evolving,” until he finally made his announcement Wednesday. 

To me, the timing of the president’s announcement seems completely motivated by politics, rather than a conclusion to the evolution of his stance on the issue.

Announcing his support of gay marriage can help Obama win back some of the more moderate voters he might be losing to Romney and reenergize many of his supporters.

 In terms of political strategy, it is a rather sound move.  

My problem with Obama on this occasion is that he is attempting to rally support for the upcoming election by using an issue he has absolutely no power over.

Not only that, but the federal government should have no power on marital law. 

If you read through the 4,543 words of our constitution, not once will you see anything about marriage, whether it is between a man and a woman or anything else for that matter. The constitution does not discuss this topic at all. 

Not even Congress’ favorite “We can do whatever we want” clause, the “Necessary and Proper” clause, would give the federal government the ability to make a ruling on this issue.

This clause grants the federal government the power “to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers.”

Congress would not be able to apply this clause because marital law has nothing to do with “carrying into execution the foregoing powers.”

Our federal government needs to stop wasting its time discussing issues over which it has no power.

While President Obama has every right to state his position on gay marriage, people need to realize he has no influence on the legality of the issue.

This is an issue that needs to be dealt with at the state level.

States have the ability to decide legality. This is a perfect example of why our country was designed the way it was.

The states can represent their citizens’ beliefs and needs better than a large federal government.

Since our country was founded, the federal government has constantly expanded its reach beyond what it was designed to actually do.

The issue of gay marriage is a perfect example of why the federal government needs to stay within its boundaries and let the states work it out for
 themselves.

­— wfgryna@indiana.edu