Page 12 of 31 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 301

Thread: Obama Administration Drops Defense of Anti-Gay Marriage Law

  1. #111
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:54 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Obama Administration Drops Defense of Anti-Gay Marriage Law

    Moderator's Warning:
    Obama Administration Drops Defense of Anti-Gay Marriage LawCould we move the discussion of christian beliefs regarding SSM and gay issues to one of the many more appropriate threads and let this go back to being about the decision not to defend DOMA in court. Thank you.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  2. #112
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Obama Administration Drops Defense of Anti-Gay Marriage Law

    Done and done. I think there is significant legal questions around the validity of DOMA. It essentially amended the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution in order to ensure that State, previously held under the same clause to recognize marriages performed in other states, could exclude same sex marriage if they choose. The same was done with interracial marriage (and interestingly enough, interracial marriage is what also spurred the creation of the Marriage License). However, to properly do that you must properly amend the Constitution; which requires ratification by the States and the People by super majority.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  3. #113
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Obama Administration Drops Defense of Anti-Gay Marriage Law

    Quote Originally Posted by DontDoIt View Post
    Seems pretty contradictory that he claims to be a Christian and at the same time supports gay marriage.
    Not really. Many Christians agree in gay marriage, many don't care one way or the other. It is really on the fringe evangelical and mormon groups that make a big ruckus about it. Jesus himself wasn't overly concerned with gay issues.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  4. #114
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Obama Administration Drops Defense of Anti-Gay Marriage Law

    Quote Originally Posted by DontDoIt View Post
    Well all know that the Bible is against same sex marriage, if we can't agree on this, then it isn't even worthy of having the debate. There are many people who slap the label of "Christian" on them, but we all know someone who claims to be a Christian, and is the farthest thing from it. However, if you truly are a Christian, that means you believe in Jesus Christ, and the Bible. If you truly believe in it, not just what you choose to, then you're agreeing with the Bible's advocancy toward prohibiting same sex marraige. If Obama is a true Christian, then putting God before himself should be no problem, and in this case he is doing quite the opposite, is he not?
    So I'm assuming that you also don't eat shellfish or where clothing made from two types of fiber, am I correct? Because that is against god's word as well...and you know that if you truly are "Christian" and believe in the bible, and that is TRULY believe in it, not just what you choose to, then you're agreeing with the Bible's views towards prohibiting the eating of shellfish and wearing clothing made from two types of fibers. If you are a true "Christian"...then putting God before yourself should not be a problem right? Are you one of those people who just takes bits and pieces of the bible that you want to agree/disagree with?
    Last edited by disneydude; 02-24-11 at 06:34 PM.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  5. #115
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Obama Administration Drops Defense of Anti-Gay Marriage Law

    You can't have a President decide on his own, he doesn't agree with a law, that he (not a Judge, not Congress and not the SCOTUS) won't enforce it. He can't pick and choose which laws which were voted and passed by Congress, which was signed by a prior Presidents he's going to support. Such a thing is inherently dangerous and threatens the foundation this country is built on. This will be a major issue in the 2012 election. He's not King and it's wrong.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  6. #116
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:54 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Obama Administration Drops Defense of Anti-Gay Marriage Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    You can't have a President decide on his own, he doesn't agree with a law, that he (not a Judge, not Congress and not the SCOTUS) won't enforce it. He can't pick and choose which laws which were voted and passed by Congress, which was signed by a prior Presidents he's going to support. Such a thing is inherently dangerous and threatens the foundation this country is built on. This will be a major issue in the 2012 election. He's not King and it's wrong.
    Again, he is not choosing to not enforce the law. He is choosing to not defend the law from legal challenges in a court of law, which is so irregular that there are actual procedures for doing it. Bush did it, Obama is doing it, it has been done by presidents before them. All your over the top rhetoric is not going to change the actual facts.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  7. #117
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,824

    Re: Obama Administration Drops Defense of Anti-Gay Marriage Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    You can't have a President decide on his own, he doesn't agree with a law, that he (not a Judge, not Congress and not the SCOTUS) won't enforce it. He can't pick and choose which laws which were voted and passed by Congress, which was signed by a prior Presidents he's going to support. Such a thing is inherently dangerous and threatens the foundation this country is built on. This will be a major issue in the 2012 election. He's not King and it's wrong.
    I know Redress already said this (twice now) but I'm repeating it so people get this into their heads.

    The President has not decided to "not enforce" DOMA. He has decided not to defend it in court. There's a difference, and it's an important one.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  8. #118
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Obama Administration Drops Defense of Anti-Gay Marriage Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Again, he is not choosing to not enforce the law. He is choosing to not defend the law from legal challenges in a court of law, which is so irregular that there are actual procedures for doing it. Bush did it, Obama is doing it, it has been done by presidents before them. All your over the top rhetoric is not going to change the actual facts.
    Really... what law did Bush decide not to defend and which other Presidents? It's my understanding that this is unprecedented.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  9. #119
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:54 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Obama Administration Drops Defense of Anti-Gay Marriage Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    Really... what law did Bush decide not to defend and which other Presidents? It's my understanding that this is unprecedented.
    I found out this earlier in the thread. Reposting the link: Law.com - Government's 'Duty to Defend' Not a Given

    For example, then-acting Solicitor General Paul Clement in 2004 told Congress "the government does not have a viable argument to advance" in defense of a federal law that barred mass-transit agencies receiving federal funds from allowing ads on buses and subways promoting the use of medical marijuana. The reason: The law amounted to viewpoint discrimination, which the U.S. Supreme Court was unlikely to permit.

    Sometimes the reason is strategic. In 2008, the Justice Department reported it was not appealing a district judge's finding that certain provisions of the federal child pornography law were unconstitutional in the case of an Iowa man. The judge had allowed the rest of the prosecution to proceed, however, and the government decided that an appeal defending the rejected parts of the law would delay the trial too long. The letter promised that the department would defend the law in other cases.
    According to the article, it has happened 13 times since 2004.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  10. #120
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Obama Administration Drops Defense of Anti-Gay Marriage Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    I found out this earlier in the thread. Reposting the link: Law.com - Government's 'Duty to Defend' Not a Given



    According to the article, it has happened 13 times since 2004.
    I just read that and while very interesting --- SG's and DOJ lawyers may have argued that during those specific cases, no President has come out and declared it though, not like this. Holder read the letter from the President where he stated:

    Quote Originally Posted by ABC News
    Obama "has made the determination," Holder wrote, that Section 3 "as applied to same-sex couples who are legally married under state law, violates the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment."
    I'm sorry but that's not for him to decide. You may argue that this is clear exception due as the law infringes on Executive powers but I don't see how it does. To be fair, I don't see the need to circumvent the process by simply declaring "I don't agree" and ignore it in any of the cases... this is a backdoor veto without having to step up and put pen to paper. So my "hyperbolic" rhetoric stands... what's unconstitutional is this type of action no matter who does it. That the President is violating his own Article II vow for what... political gain to get more votes during the upcoming election in 2012? Not surprising...
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


Page 12 of 31 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •