Happy LGBT Pride Month!

So President Obama could not be troubled to carve a few minutes out of his schedule to attend the National Day of Prayer observance in Washington on May 7. Yet, a formal Presidential proclamation was issued declaring June as National Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered Pride Month. (Try Googling "Heterosexual Pride Month", by the way; nothing comes up.)

What a difference one election cycle makes. I will have some choice (but perfectly holy) words for the next person who tries to convince me that there's not a dime's worth of difference between the two major parties. Were President McCain in the Oval Office today, we conservatives would have encountered a disappointment or two by now; I'm certain of that. But I'm also sure that June 2009 would have received a different designation than it has under this President.

Yes, I know symbolism isn't everything. But gestures like this go a long way, and it happens to come at the same time that Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont; go figure) "has offered a bill that would allow American citizens and legal immigrants to seek residency in the United States for their same-sex partners, just as spouses now petition for foreign-born husbands and wives." (quote from the New York Times)

It occurs to me that in over a year of blogging, I have never (to the best of my memory) weighed in on the subject of homosexuality. That probably sends its own message. As a Christian who believes in the inspiration and infallibility of the Bible, I believe homosexual eroticism is a sin. I also believe that many other sexual practices in which consenting adults engage are sinful; I have no desire for government to step into the bedrooms of consenting adults. Call me something of a libertarian on the issue.

Still, it is a long way from there to the redefinition of marriage, and we are well on the way to that destination. Obama claims to oppose gay marriage, yet he gets a pass on the issue while Sarah Palin is vilified for it. Does anyone seriously believe that Obama would sign the Defense of Marriage Act, as his most recent Democrat predecessor did in the mid-90's?

Also, an ancillary issue to the gay marriage debate that highly concerns me involves what our kids begin to be taught in public education about the nature of marriage as high-profile politicians continue to advance its redefinition, both silently and overtly.

Perhaps most alarming of all are the historically demonstrated ramifications for a society that loses the fundamental building block that marriage, as traditionally defined, composes. No such civilization can lost for long, for any number of reasons.

If President Obama is truly a friend of traditional marriage, it is high time for some up-to-date reassurance from him. We've not received any in a while.