I really hate writing these kinds of posts.

On balance, I’m generally happy with President Obama’s job performance. He’s making progress in a lot of areas I generally support: He’s doing a lot to improve America’s reputation abroad, is actually making some movement toward health care reform, and those new fuel efficiency standards truly and utterly rawk.

However, when the Obama justice department goes and files a legal brief defending the completely wrong-headed and Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), making use of the same bigoted arguments that the last guy’s party routinely uses (likening same-sex marriage to incest and such), I get, shall we say, a bit frustrated.

I’m well aware that the President’s personally squishy on same-sex marriage issues; I knew that when I voted for him (I’m quite used to being generally more liberal than most Democratic politicians); the other guy was no better (and his chosen VP was decidedly worse), and I’m far from a one-issue voter; pragmatism ruled the day.

Of course, Obama, during the campaign ( and as President, at least through April 2009), routinely called for the repeal of DOMA (which allows states to not recognize same sex marriages certified by other states, ignoring the Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit clause, and prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage), citing that it deprives legally recognized married couples full federal rights and benefits. During the primary campaign, Obama’s exact words were (as quoted by the above link) “I believe we should get rid of the statute altogether. Federal law should not discriminate in any way against gay and lesbian couples, which is precisely what DOMA does.”

As usual, there are competing theories about why this brief was filed which portray Obama as not necessarily shifting policy; a Justice Department spokesman, for example, offers that DOJ has to defend laws an on the books when they’re challenged regardless of the administration’s position; essentially, it’s a specialized procedural legal document, and not particularly important in the scheme of things, and certainly not reflective of the Administration’s policy. Assuming this is true (and in all reality, it probably is), I’m kind of conflicted; this brief seems (at least to my reading, recognizing that IANAL) tilted a little toward the moralistic side. At the same time, however, I’m kind of glad that the DOJ is making a good faith effort to objectively defend a law that is on the books, regardless of the administration’s position on said law, rather than letting politics dictate these things (a problem in the last administration). And, as usual, there’s the usual “long game/drive the discussion” theories, which I’d love to have total faith in, but can’t ignore my rational brain enough to get behind personally.

However, again assuming this assertion is true, a real policy statement by the administration reiterating the position that the law needs to be repealed, for the previously cited reasons, would make those of us who sincerly support equality in terms of marriage and every other area of basic civil rights for gays and lesbians feel a lot less like we’ve been thrown under the bus. I understand that the administration is multi-tasking like mad, and has all kinds of irons in the fire all the time on all kinds of important issues (some of which are arguably more pressing than this one), but even a quick press release written by a low-level white house staffer would help mitigate some of the controversy and outrage, especially if this particular document is simply a boring procedural piece of legalese.

In any case, this is still an open issue, and I assume that more information will spew forth in days to come, but it’s frustrating nonetheless, even if it is meaningless. As an politically active and aware citizen, I’ll be letting the administration know how I feel, if for no other reason than to ensure I’ve made my feelings known. If this, or any other issue has you concerned at all, I encourage you to do the same.