It was a political issue in 2008, it was a ballot initiative. You grandiose view of the issue doesn't change the fact that he is being punished for his political expression.
Is it impossible for an issue to be both political and human rights related? Did the political nature of the civil rights movement of the 1960s somehow make it less of a human rights issue?
@visualR: No. To publicly take a position and then not change it is to keep that position, for one thing. Furthermore, he has made it clear that he has not changed it over the last week with his blog post and interview.
@Rinon: His views amount to bigotry, so not changing them merely amounts to unrepentant bigotry. Did you have great respect for those who fought on for Jim Crow laws, or who today use voter intimidation to express their lack of compromise? I would rather his views changed, because they are harmful and indicate a deep prejudice, or that he suffer the consequences of publicly taking a position against awarding a group civil rights.
Would you rather he compromise his integrity to "change" his opinion on something based on pressure? I personally respect people who do not pretend to change their views, regardless of whether I agree with them. I also respect people who, after careful consideration, do truly change their mind, but I cannot require this of anyone but myself.
