PDA

View Full Version : Gov't drops defense of anti-gay marriage law


SteelCityMom
02-23-2011, 03:32 PM
Gov't drops defense of anti-gay marriage law
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110223/ap_on_re_us/us_gay_marriage

By PETE YOST, Associated Press 45 mins ago
WASHINGTON In a major policy reversal, the Obama administration said Wednesday it will no longer defend the constitutionality of a federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriage.

Attorney General Eric Holder said President Barack Obama has concluded that the administration cannot defend the federal law that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman. He noted that the congressional debate during passage of the Defense of Marriage Act "contains numerous expressions reflecting moral disapproval of gays and lesbians and their intimate and family relationships precisely the kind of stereotype-based thinking and animus" the Constitution is designed to guard against.

The Justice Department had defended the act in court until now.

The move quickly drew praise from some Democrats in Congress but a sharp response from the spokesman for Republican John Boehner, the House Speaker.

"While Americans want Washington to focus on creating jobs and cutting spending, the president will have to explain why he thinks now is the appropriate time to stir up a controversial issue that sharply divides the nation," said Boehner's spokesman Michael Steel.

Gay groups, which had long pressured the administration to take a step like this, were pleased. Ron Carey, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, called the policy change "a tremendous step toward recognizing our common humanity and ending an egregious injustice against thousands of loving, committed couples who simply want the protections, rights and responsibilities afforded other married couples. We thank the Obama administration."

Obama's move may position him politically at the forefront of rising public support for gay marriage. Polling results can vary rather significantly depending on what words are used to describe gay marriage, but there is a gradual trend in public opinion toward more acceptance of gay marriage.

An Associated Press-National Constitution Center Poll conducted last August found 52 percent of Americans saying the federal government should give legal recognition to marriages between couples of the same sex, while 46 percent said it should not. In polling by ABC News and the Washington Post, support for the legalization of gay marriage has climbed from 37 percent in 2003 to 47 percent in February 2010.

Holder's statement said, "Much of the legal landscape has changed in the 15 years since Congress passed" the Defense of Marriage Act. He noted that the Supreme Court has ruled that laws criminalizing homosexual conduct are unconstitutional and that Congress has repealed the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

At the White House, spokesman Jay Carney said Obama himself is still "grappling" with his personal view of gay marriage but has always personally opposed the Defense of Marriage Act as "unnecessary and unfair."

Boehner that Obama has concluded the Defense of Marriage Act fails to meet a rigorous standard under which courts view with suspicion any laws targeting minority groups who have suffered a history of discrimination.

The attorney general said the Justice Department had defended the law in court until now because the government was able to advance reasonable arguments for the law based on a less strict standard.

At a December news conference, in response to a reporters' question, Obama revealed that his position on gay marriage is "constantly evolving." He has opposed such marriages and supported instead civil unions for gay and lesbian couples. The president said such civil unions are his baseline at this point, as he put it.

"This is something that we're going to continue to debate, and I personally am going to continue to wrestle with going forward," he said.

On Wednesday, Holder said the president has concluded that, given a documented history of discrimination against gays, classifications based on sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened standard of scrutiny than the department had been applying in legal challenges to the act up to now.

The attorney general said the department will immediately bring the policy change to the attention of two federal courts now hearing separate lawsuits targeting the Defense of Marriage Act.

One case, in Connecticut, challenges the federal government's denial of marriage-related protections for federal Family Medical Leave Act benefits, federal laws for private pension plans and federal laws concerning state pension plans. In the other case in New york City, the federal government refused to recognize the marriage of two women and taxed the inheritance that one of the women left to the other as though the two were strangers. Under federal tax law, a spouse who dies can leave her assets, including the family home, to the other spouse without incurring estate taxes.

ricardisimo
02-23-2011, 04:37 PM
Wow. Obama doing something right for a change. Actually, not even that... he's just stopping doing something wrong. I guess I should thank our Lord Jesus for these small miracles.

Steelboy84
02-23-2011, 08:16 PM
good

Wallace108
02-23-2011, 10:00 PM
In a major policy reversal, the Obama administration said Wednesday it will no longer defend the constitutionality of a federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriage.
Are they also no longer going to defend the constitutionality of Obamacare? :scratchchin:

caplovestroyp43
02-24-2011, 11:58 AM
This is just wrong, wrong, wrong. Marriage = 1 man, 1 woman.

Someone has to get this disgrace out of office. The sooner the better. He has no respect at all for this country, its people or our beloved constitution. Our forefathers would cartwheel in their grave if they knew what was going on now!!!!

:mad::mad::mad:

SteelCityMom
02-24-2011, 12:14 PM
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Section 1 of the 14th Amendment.

As for our forefathers turning in their graves...they were slave owners and pot growers (and smokers), so I'm sure they take issue with more than one law on our books. :chuckle:

steelax04
02-24-2011, 01:03 PM
This is just wrong, wrong, wrong. Marriage = 1 man, 1 woman.


According to... ?

MasterOfPuppets
02-24-2011, 01:52 PM
let them eat cake.

everybody should have the right to experience a lousy marriage...:chuckle:
i'm sure the blood sucking divorce lawyers are doing cartwheels.

ricardisimo
02-24-2011, 06:25 PM
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Section 1 of the 14th Amendment.

As for our forefathers turning in their graves...they were slave owners and pot growers (and smokers), so I'm sure they take issue with more than one law on our books. :chuckle:
Not to mention that the fellow who actually composed the U.S. Constitution, Gouverneur Morris, was - you guessed it - gay. A homo. As queer as a three shilling note.

tony hipchest
02-24-2011, 06:34 PM
is that why the conthstitution readths with a lithsp?

SteelCityMom
02-24-2011, 07:26 PM
Not to mention that the fellow who actually composed the U.S. Constitution, Gouverneur Morris, was - you guessed it - gay. A homo. As queer as a three shilling note.

That would tickle me if it were true, but do you have something to support that statement? Everything I've ever read on him points to the notion that he was a womanizer on the scale of Tiger Woods.

ricardisimo
02-25-2011, 05:29 AM
is that why the conthstitution readths with a lithsp?
No, thatsth becauthe there were Thpaniardth involved in writing it.
http://poparmy.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/pirate-gallery-cheech-and-chong-yellowbeard.jpg

That would tickle me if it were true, but do you have something to support that statement? Everything I've ever read on him points to the notion that he was a womanizer on the scale of Tiger Woods.
I will get my investigative gears a'turning. I could swear it was mentioned either in the Farrand book on the Framers, or as a side note in Zinn's History.

caplovestroyp43
02-25-2011, 11:12 AM
According to... ?

God's Word. The Bible.

SteelersinCA
02-25-2011, 12:56 PM
God's Word. The Bible.

And where exactly does the Bible fit into the Constitution? I could of sworn I read something about it in there.....:noidea:

steelax04
02-25-2011, 01:00 PM
God's Word. The Bible.

Exactly. Which is not the Constitution. The founding fathers purposefully left out any endorsements of religion in the Constitution. If the Bible was meant to be the law of the land, don't you think they would have made some mention of it? Point being, I don't know how this is disrespectful to our Constitution or why the founders of this country would be rolling in their graves.

ricardisimo
02-25-2011, 03:34 PM
And where exactly does the Bible fit into the Constitution? I could of sworn I read something about it in there.....:noidea:
It's in Article Eight, which renders the preceding seven subject to review at any time by any sufficiently offended clergy members. Not many people know about Article Eight, but then most Americans haven't read past the third word of their Supreme Law. :doh:

steelax04
02-25-2011, 03:38 PM
It's in Article Eight, which renders the preceding seven subject to review at any time by any sufficiently offended clergy members. Not many people know about Article Eight, but then most Americans haven't read past the third word of their Supreme Law. :doh:

Damn it... I was content with "Hasta La Vista!" I'll start putting the "baby" in there for good measure.

Steelboy84
02-26-2011, 02:24 AM
God's Word. The Bible.

Would it be fair to say that the Koran, the Talmud, the Torah, the Book of the Dead are all God's word too? They were all divinely inspired as well.

SteelersinCA
02-26-2011, 04:38 PM
Would it be fair to say that the Koran, the Talmud, the Torah, the Book of the Dead are all God's word too? They were all divinely inspired as well.

Sometimes I feel like the magazine I read while I'm on the porcelain throne is divinely inspired.:wink02:

MasterOfPuppets
02-26-2011, 06:28 PM
God's Word. The Bible.
seperation from church and state , which is what our " founding fathers " wanted , not only means "freedom of religion " , but freedom FROM religion .
if our founding fathers are rolling in their grave over anything , it would be for the way our government is subsidizing churches by giving them tax exempt status , which forces the citizens to pick up the slack.

here's some quotes from some of our founding fathers...
ben franklin

"When a Religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its Professors are obliged to call for help of the Civil Power, it is a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one." - Benjamin Franklin (from a letter to Richard Price, October 9, 1780;)

Thomas Jefferson:

"I have examined all the known superstitions of the word, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth."

"Christianity...(has become) the most perverted system that ever shone on man. ...Rogueries, absurdities and untruths were perpetrated upon the teachings of Jesus by a large band of dupes and importers led by Paul, the first great corrupter of the teaching of Jesus."

"The clergy converted the simple teachings of Jesus into an engine for enslaving mankind and adulterated by artificial constructions into a contrivance to filch wealth and power to themselves...these clergy, in fact, constitute the real Anti-Christ.

Jefferson's word for the Bible? "Dunghill."

Thomas Paine:

"I would not dare to so dishonor my Creator God by attaching His name to that book (the Bible)."
"Among the most detestable villains in history, you could not find one worse than Moses. Here is an order, attributed to 'God' to butcher the boys, to massacre the mothers and to debauch and rape the daughters. I would not dare so dishonor my Creator's name by (attaching) it to this filthy book (the Bible)."

"It is the duty of every true Deist to vindicate the moral justice of God against the evils of the Bible."

"Accustom a people to believe that priests and clergy can forgive sins...and you will have sins in abundance."

And; "The Christian church has set up a religion of pomp and revenue in pretended imitation of a person (Jesus) who lived a life of poverty."

James Madison:

"What influence in fact have Christian ecclesiastical establishments had on civil society? In many instances they have been upholding the thrones of political tyranny. In no instance have they been seen as the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to subvert the public liberty have found in the clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate liberty, does not need the clergy."

John Adams:

"Where do we find a precept in the Bible for Creeds, Confessions, Doctrines and Oaths, and whole carloads of other trumpery that we find religion encumbered with in these days?"

Just six years after the First Amendment became an official part of the Constitution, the U.S. Senate read (in the English language) and ratified a treaty with Tripoli which included in Article 11 the following assertion: "The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion" (John Adams, 1797, Hunter Miller, ed., Treaties and other International Acts, 2:365).

SteelersinCA
02-28-2011, 12:19 AM
Bravo MOP.

Steelboy84
02-28-2011, 05:23 PM
seperation from church and state , which is what our " founding fathers " wanted , not only means "freedom of religion " , but freedom FROM religion .
if our founding fathers are rolling in their grave over anything , it would be for the way our government is subsidizing churches by giving them tax exempt status , which forces the citizens to pick up the slack.

here's some quotes from some of our founding fathers...




:applaudit: :applaudit: :applaudit: :applaudit: :applaudit:


"All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, "Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."


"It is from the Bible that man has learned cruelty, rapine and murder; for the belief of a cruel God makes a cruel man."


"The study of theology, as it stands in Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on nothing; it proceeds by no authorities; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing and admits of no conclusion."


"No falsehood is so fatal as that which is made an article of faith."


"Of all the tyrannies that afflict mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst. Every other species of tyranny is limited to the world we live in, but this attempts a stride beyond the grave and seeks to pursue us into eternity."


"What is it the New Testament teaches us? To believe that the Almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married; and the belief of this debauchery is called faith."


"The Bible: a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalise mankind."


"The Christian system of religion is an outrage on common sense."


"The Bible is a book that has been read more, and examined less, than any book that ever existed."


"Priests and conjurors are of the same trade."


"The story of the redemption will not stand examination. That man should redeem himself from the sin of eating an apple by committing a murder on Jesus Christ, is the strangest system of religion ever set up."


--Thomas Paine

ricardisimo
03-01-2011, 02:55 AM
I think it's time for some Nietzsche, as long as we're gang-tackling...
In Christianity neither morality nor religion come into contact with reality at any point.
The very word "Christianity" is a misunderstanding in truth, there was only one Christian, and he died on the cross.
I cannot believe in a God who wants to be praised all the time.
After coming into contact with a religious man I always feel I must wash my hands.
Is man one of God's blunders? Or is God one of man's blunders?
A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.
"Faith" means not wanting to know what is true.
And finally, for those who would have the state dictate lifestyles (or anything else) to us...
Everything the State says is a lie, and everything it has it has stolen.

SteelersinCA
03-01-2011, 11:53 AM
Bravo Ric.

zulater
03-03-2011, 02:36 PM
Not to mention that the fellow who actually composed the U.S. Constitution, Gouverneur Morris, was - you guessed it - gay. A homo. As queer as a three shilling note.



Did he smoke doobie and make it with his male slaves?

:chuckle:

ricardisimo
03-03-2011, 04:25 PM
Did he smoke doobie and make it with his male slaves?

:chuckle:
Is there any doubt? These guys knew how to live large. He was also very witty, great with his money, and lived in an adorable converted loft in a regentrified section of Queens (where else?) where he restored antique furniture that the straights were stupidly throwing away.

hicksfan
03-08-2011, 12:11 PM
This is just wrong, wrong, wrong. Marriage = 1 man, 1 woman.

if you're going to keep in in that perspective, keep it in the FULL perspective of that time. marriage = man owning a woman. but since we've evolved from that frame of mind there's no rational argument that rings true as to not allowing someone to marry whoever they truly love regardless of gender.

hicksfan
03-08-2011, 12:12 PM
God's Word. The Bible.

who does god morally allow an intersexual to have relationship with? i missed that meeting.