Skip to comments.Obama Immigration Reform's Inclusion of Same-Sex Couples a 'Deal-Killer?'
Posted on 02/03/2013 1:14:09 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Evangelicals who have come together to support immigration reform have expressed concern over the White House's decision to include support for same-sex couples in their official immigration proposal.
While not mentioning the issue during his Tuesday speech demanding comprehensive immigration reform, President Barack Obama's proposal does include measures that pertain to same-sex couples.
The Rev. Gabriel Salguero, president of the National Latino Evangelical Coalition, told The Christian Post that he questioned the inclusion of another hot button issue in an already tense subject.
"It seems to me that you are combining two disparate issues when it hasn't been resolved in the national consciousness. I do not understand it strategically," said Salguero. "We want immigration reform, but I think to put this issue as part of it is really going to complicate it for conservatives who really want immigration reform."
Dr. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, told CP that such a proposal would be a "deal-killer." "Same-sex partner provisions such as those included in the Uniting American Families Act would be strongly opposed by many in our communities who are otherwise sympathetic or even enthusiastic about the benefits of immigration reform," said Land.
"[President Obama] needs to understand that's a deal breaker for lots of us and it needs to not be in there." In a speech delivered Tuesday about immigration reform, President Obama laid out the many components to reform that he believed were needed.
The president's proposal will also include extending certain immigration benefits to bi-national same-sex couples, who presently do not receive the same benefits as opposite-sex couples.
According to the section on "Streamlining Legal Immigration" on an online White House fact-sheet, "It also treats same-sex families as families by giving U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents the ability to seek a visa on the basis of a permanent relationship with a same-sex partner."
Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, said in a statement that he took issue with that part of the proposal due to current federal law. "This is yet another example of the President playing politics rather than enforcing our nation's laws and offering a true, workable solution," said Brown.
"First, his Administration threw in the towel and refused to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Then, he came out of the closet on gay marriage. Now, he is apparently proposing a direct violation of DOMA, currying added favor with gay activists, many of whom have lavished contributions on his reelection campaign."
Regarding how successful such a proposal for this extension of benefits would be, Land told CP that he doubted the effort would get through Congress.
"I don't think it will be in any proposal that passes the House and the Senate because with it in there it won't pass the House and the Senate," said Land.
"So the president needs to decide whether he wants to immigration reform passed this year or not
We're just saying that that's a deal-killer."
WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?
Exactly! Obama is what he is. He cannot change his spots. The 'Progressive" ideology is so deeply ingrained in him that it is impossible for him to even consider alternatives even if it means the failure of his plan.
I wasn't alive back then, but wouldn't that be a novel idea for an immigration policy?
Obama and the gays are doing what they said they would not do....forcing recognition of their way onto everybody else. This “hey-look-at-us” approach is unwise and could result in an early backlash. Gays will do best if they just go along with their daily lives like everybody else because now there is no need to act up.
Now it's being used to promote the public acceptance of disease-ridden, boy-raping whackjobs.
I say we double down on this and ONLY allow gay immigrants in, that would mean that “statistically” we could but immigration down by over 90% if there wasn’t any fraud...
Oh wait... Fraud is rampant...
Of course, as it turns out he had already implemented immigration via same sex marriage:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.