Feds drop defense of DOMA

[TallOne]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_gay_marriage

One big step closer.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Yeasty times, as Joanna Russ used to say.

Between the neocons trying to gut the country and the progressives trying to patch it back together with scotch tape..

 

[Etoile]

Had a conversation about this on my way out of work yesterday. The only problem was, I was talking about DADT. I think the other person was wondering why I was ranting about the military in a conversation about DOMA.

Sometimes I work too hard.

It's a step!

 

[Safe_Bet]

Had a conversation about this on my way out of work yesterday. The only problem was, I was talking about DADT. I think the other person was wondering why I was ranting about the military in a conversation about DOMA.

Sometimes I work too hard.

It's a step!

The problem is that it's a step to the side.

All Obama's DoJ did was sluff it off to the Republican Fundies who HAVE to defend their homophobia.

After all it's one of the linchpins of their hate agenda. It's right up there with beating down uppity women, uppity unions and uppity uppity socialist commies (aka any one to the left of Regan).

If Holder / the Obama administration had done what was truly right they would not only have declared it unconstitutional but would have actively called on the judiciary to dismiss all the cases as opposed to inviting other people to take their place as litigants.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Obama is feeling the need to campaign for 2012. He's remembering that he got to the white house on minority votes, and minority votes are the only votes that will keep him there a second term.

 

[John Doe]

The problem is that it's a step to the side.

All Obama's DoJ did was sluff it off to the Republican Fundies who HAVE to defend their homophobia.

After all it's one of the linchpins of their hate agenda. It's right up there with beating down uppity women, uppity unions and uppity uppity socialist commies (aka any one to the left of Regan).

If Holder / the Obama administration had done what was truly right they would not only have declared it unconstitutional but would have actively called on the judiciary to dismiss all the cases as opposed to inviting other people to take their place as litigants.

The executive branch does and should not have the power to rule anything unconstitutional (or constitutional for that matter) or to to direct the judiciary to do anything.

 

[Netzach]

The executive branch does and should not have the power to rule anything unconstitutional (or constitutional for that matter) or to to direct the judiciary to do anything.

Yes on A, B happens all the time.

 

[Jagged]

The President is ignoring the law rather than changing it. I'm against that on principal. If he has issue with it, talk to congress about changing the law. He enforced it for two years what changed? This has nothing to do with my feelings on the issue rather the law. There is a right way to do things.

 

[John Doe]

Yes on A, B happens all the time.

Perhaps I misspoke. What I should've said was the executive should not try to authoritatively direct the judiciary to rule a certain way or even accept/reject certain cases. Maybe that happens a lot too, but I still think it shouldn't.

The President is ignoring the law rather than changing it. I'm against that on principal. If he has issue with it, talk to congress about changing the law. He enforced it for two years what changed? This has nothing to do with my feelings on the issue rather the law. There is a right way to do things.

True, but the problem here is similar to the problem with the federal ban on marijuana use and possession and that problem is the great difficulty of repealing those laws. I think Obama is trying to split the difference because he knows DOMA probably won't be gotten rid of by Congress or at least not any time soon.

I'm not saying he should do things that way. I'm just saying I think that's the motivation.

 

[Etoile]

True, but the problem here is similar to the problem with the federal ban on marijuana use and possession and that problem is the great difficulty of repealing those laws. I think Obama is trying to split the difference because he knows DOMA probably won't be gotten rid of by Congress or at least not any time soon.

I'm not saying he should do things that way. I'm just saying I think that's the motivation.

Agreed.

And honestly, I'm okay with baby steps. A lot of people aren't, but I am. It's slow, but it's better than nothing. Knocking out DOMA is going to be nigh-impossible, but it'll be a lot easier if it goes slowly. I'd rather have it slow and successful than fast and failed.

Meanwhile, other states are making progress. Hawaii and Maryland recently posted good news on the marriage equality front. Call me an optimist, but I see mainly good things ahead in this arena.

 

[John Doe]

Agreed.

And honestly, I'm okay with baby steps. A lot of people aren't, but I am. It's slow, but it's better than nothing. Knocking out DOMA is going to be nigh-impossible, but it'll be a lot easier if it goes slowly. I'd rather have it slow and successful than fast and failed.

Meanwhile, other states are making progress. Hawaii and Maryland recently posted good news on the marriage equality front. Call me an optimist, but I see mainly good things ahead in this arena.

Well, as it turns out a lot of people on both sides of the issue (including myself) jumped to conclusions here. Apparently the Obama administration stopped short of declaring the law unconstitutional or ignoring it. In Holder's letter they just said they didn't agree with parts of it. That's fine. They're well within their rights as citizens and powers as members of the executive branch to express their opinion.

Anyway, it should be interesting to see how this develops.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Sort of like not agreeing with certain parts of a boiled egg...

but whatever.

 

[Jagged]

True, but the problem here is similar to the problem with the federal ban on marijuana use and possession and that problem is the great difficulty of repealing those laws. I think Obama is trying to split the difference because he knows DOMA probably won't be gotten rid of by Congress or at least not any time soon.

I'm not saying he should do things that way. I'm just saying I think that's the motivation.[/QUOTE]



Yes and he hasn't said is motivation and if he was truly supportive of the gay community he would have tried to change the law in the beginning when he had at least perceived support.

The legal concept is that one state can't make something legal and forces others to go along with it. The solution isn't ignoring the law.

Btw I support decriminalizing marijuana, should be something you fine people for I think, and as far at those who are truly ill and need relief there is no question it should be available to them safely and legally.

 

[John Doe]

Sort of like not agreeing with certain parts of a boiled egg...

but whatever.

You mean scrambled? A boiled egg still has discrete parts, i.e. the white part and the yellow part...and the shell I guess, but who gives a shit about the shell? Fuck the shell.

 

[John Doe]

Yes and he hasn't said is motivation and if he was truly supportive of the gay community he would have tried to change the law in the beginning when he had at least perceived support.

But you know he's not, right? I've been saying that for years.

The legal concept is that one state can't make something legal and forces others to go along with it. The solution isn't ignoring the law.

I didn't say it was.

Btw I support decriminalizing marijuana, should be something you fine people for I think, and as far at those who are truly ill and need relief there is no question it should be available to them safely and legally.

I didn't state my opinion on the legality of marijuana one way or the other. I was just using it for comparison.