What's new

Gay Marriage

Status
Not open for further replies.
Of course DoJ was wrong.

You don't get to choose what laws you seek to enforce or ignore. If the law goes against your beliefs then Obama should have sought remedy in Congress.

Even though I think DOMA is a bunch of BS, the DoJ is duty bound to defend the law.
 
DoJ never said they would not enforce DOMA. The right wingers always like to twist that around to lie about what happened. What Obama and the DoJ said was that they would not defend the law in court if the law were contested. The law was enforced up until it was struck down by the SCOTUS. There is a big difference.
 
so how many of these are judges turning what the people voted for?
 
No idea. Quite a few I suspect as most the decisions seem to be overturning amendment to state constitutions. According to the way that the judges seem to be interpreting the DOMA case, these state amendments are in violation of the US constitution.

Just because the people want it and pass a law or amendment does not mean it is constitutional.
 
SSMgifEdited4.gif
 
Ms Tree said:
DoJ never said they would not enforce DOMA. The right wingers always like to twist that around to lie about what happened. What Obama and the DoJ said was that they would not defend the law in court if the law were contested. The law was enforced up until it was struck down by the SCOTUS. There is a big difference.
 
Not defending it in court ....isn't that 'not enforcing it'?
 
 

President Obama Instructs Justice Department to Stop Defending Defense of Marriage Act calls Clinton-Signed Law “Unconstitutional”
ABC
 
President Obama has instructed the Justice Department to stop defending the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, which has since 1996 allowed states to refuse to recognize same-sex partnerships legally recognized in other states.
 
Chuck Donovan, a senior research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation said that “After a series of steps that undermined the legal case for the Defense of Marriage Act, the Obama Administration has apparently decided to drop its mask and publicly switch sides.  This action raises the stakes in this litigation even higher, because both portions of DOMA – both the federal definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman, as well as the authority of Congress under Article 4 of the Constitution to interpret the Full Faith and Credit Clause to allow states to protect similar definitions – are now at heightened risk.”
 
 



Gay marriage protest: Man seeks right to marry Macbook
 
May 7, 2014 by M.S. Scully

“A former judge advocate and combat veteran” has filed motions in two states on behalf of ”other minority sexual orientation groups” to protest gay marriage.
In  court documents filed in Utah and Florida, Chris Sevier of Tennessee (right) claims he has fallen in love with his porn-filled Apple computer.
“The true question presented here is whether traditional marriage is a relationship that is ‘stand alone’ and unequal to all other forms of sexual and spiritual unions,” Sevier writes.
“Chris Sevier has moved to intervene, apparently asserting he wishes to marry his computer,” Judge Robert Hinkle ruled last month. “Perhaps the motion is satirical. Or perhaps it is only removed from reality. Either way, the motion has no place in this lawsuit.”
Sevier evidently enjoys the controversy. In the past, he has sued Apple over online porn and A&E over how it handled the suspension of Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson and he sued and “nonsuited” a case against Bill O’Reilly.
If he does like the attention, he’s gotten his wish. His story of “online mating” has gone viral.
 
 
Oregon and Pennsylvania strike down bans, Dell you can marry a man now, LOL!
 
700UW said:
Oregon and Pennsylvania strike down bans, Dell you can marry a man now, LOL!
Only if he belongs to a union! Are you lost 700?
 
You are not even smart enough to comprehend what you read.
 
Source is the Human Rights Campaign.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top