One good turn deserves another
Barack Obama has decided that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional. Oh, yes, that Barack Obama. The narcissist in chief who believes he is a dictator. The Barack Obama who is a legal genius. Oh wait; we don’t know what Barack Obama’s grades in law school were because he has never released them. The Barack Obama who is a great lawyer? No, he never tried a case.
Obama and his Attorney General, Eric Holder, have decided they know more than the Supreme Court and all other legal scholars and they were going to decide the constitutionality of this measure.
The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA as it is known, was passed by overwhelming majorities in the Senate and the House and signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1996. DOMA essentially says the Federal Government recognizes marriage to be between one man and one woman.
Gay marriage has never been approved by a state. Every time it is put to a vote, the people say no to turning marriage from a respected institution into a freak show. The only time gay marriage has been “approved” is places where it was court ordered by liberal judges.
The left has been at war with the family for decades. They want to destroy the traditional family. Why? By destroying the family, they can remake society into their socialist vision; they can also create a large group dependent on government entitlements that will vote for their reelection.
If you doubt this, look at what they have done to black America. If memory serves correctly, as late as the 1960’s black divorce rates were pretty much the same as white and illegitimacy was very rare in the black community. Now, with welfare programs that were designed to keep the father out of the picture, two thirds of all black children born in this country are illegitimate. If you want one sure ticket to be raised in poverty in this country, be a child born out of wedlock. Now, thanks to liberals, the expression “baby daddy” is now a part of the vernacular.
The left now wants to turn marriage, a mechanism that provides stability for society into something distorted beyond all recognition. Real Americans believe that marriage is between one man and one woman. Not between four men, two women and a dog.
If Obama wants to act on his own, the House or Representatives can do the same. The House cannot make Obama or Holder defend this law. It really is not within the power of Congress to do so. And if they tried, the result would be similar to the case in California, where DOJ lawyers showed up for the trial on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, but essentially put on no defense and let the other side win.
No, there is a better idea. If Obama wants to refuse to defend DOMA, then the House should cut off all funding for the Department of Justice to defend any of the eligibility lawsuits against Obama.
That’s right.
The Department of Justice is charged with defending those lawsuits. The House of Representatives has the authority to forbid the use of any Federal monies for certain purposes, such as defending the Obama eligibility lawsuits.
If Obama wants to play ball, fine, two can play that game. Of course, the obvious question is, as always, does the GOP have the courage to step up to the plate?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Leona R. Roberts on -
I don't know much about law or how courts work, but I thought our president was to uphold the law of the land. Since when is he made in charge of what's constitutional. What would happen if a president decided abortion was unconstitutional??? He would never get away with it. I think we should impeach him hasn't he done enough. Go! Go! Go! Tea Party!!!!!
-
Permalink Reply by Leonie Alemann on
-
He doesn't get to decide which laws to enforce any more than the states can legitimately "nullify" federal laws they don't like, or the House of Representatives "deem" a bill passed that has not been submitted to a vote.
This administration shows a consistent and casual disregard for the rule of law, proving that they are NOT wedded to the principles that make America unique: the universal respect for the laws of the land over any concept of "strongman" politics. It's why we study Tammany Hall in school, and have been talking about Daleys' Chicago for generations: they are NOT the norm, they are criminal enterprises that must be taken down, dismembered, and the criminals tried and convicted. The Justice Department was very successful against the Mafia; in the next administration, the AG needs to use RICO to go after the Chicago machine and the big unions.
Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.
Leonie
-
Permalink Reply by Karen boswell on
-
If the Constitution was actually followed this would be a non-issue since more than 30 States by overwhelming majorities have passed amendments to their state constitutions to define marriage as one man one woman, and since the Constitution expicitly spells out that those powers not specifically given to the Fed are retained by the states and the people and since we are a government of the people = the people have already determined the Constitutionality of DOMA. I say it is already settled law to borrow a phrase from one of the new Supremes....
-
Permalink Reply by islevicki on
-
I don't think the GOP has the guts. If they did, wouldn't it also put a stop to the Federal Lawsuit against Arizona. The GOP needs to grow some and exert their power just like Pelosi did. I don't anticipate that will happen because the GOP have always been GUTLESS WONDERS!
-
Permalink Reply by dbadj1949@yahoo.com on
-
I may be ignorant but why can't we impeach this clown?
-
Permalink Reply by Albert M. Bryson on
-
It would be nice to eliminate federal funding for defending the eligibility of President Obama law suits. It they want the funding for this they would have to agreed to defend DOMA.
-
Permalink Reply by Paul ThoMas on -
First ''Don't Ask Don't Tell'' Repealed and now D.O.M.A. deemed unConstitutional!This is truly an outrage worthy of impeachment!For starters the real accurate truthful word is ''Homosexual'' not Gay. The definition of Gay is 1. joyous and lively; merry 2. bright; brilliant: as, gay colors. Whereas the definition of Homosexual is a person having sexual desire for those of the same sex. The very idea that 3% of our population (the homosexuals), can demand that the 97% majority of us change the definition of a word to suite their political correctness fancy is absurd and something I will never bow down to or accept! If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and skips like a duck, then it's a Homosexual duck and so it should be called! I mean common sense via statistical data and the physical nature of procreation screams that Homosexuality is a birth defect and therefore worthy of our compassion like any other birth defect. Infact medical journals used to call it exactly that up until our society caved into the politically correct liberals.The truth is that the sexual acts that Homosexuals engage in are universally disgusting and repulsive to 97% of the rest of us. Every bit as repugnant as human feces or vomit, but we're all suppose to bite our tongue, hold our nose and pretend that it's not. That's ideology over reality the fundamental definition of liberalism. What's next, should we let blind people drive out of a sense of fairness to them? We are all God's children and all uniquely different. But to pretend, fantasize, idealize, and mandate that reality is or at least should be different than what it factually is, is just distorted thinking and wrong! And unfortunately a war zone will be the fastest punch in the face / reality check there is on this! In battle one must literally watch the back of his fellow man / soldier, this doesn't mean ''back-side'', or anything of a homosexual romantic nature! But therein lies the problem / head trip, our soldiers now have to deal with. They have to act and react to life and death decisions in an instant. They do not need nor want the obstacle of having to worry about being politically correct to some ''Gay-First-Guy'' in the heat of battle. That's why in the past preObamination days we used to go out of our way to remove all speed bumps for them and give them the best in arms and armor. But now with Barack Hussein Obama king of the ideolog idots in charge, it's more about making sure it's a fair fight. To him it litterally doesn't matter whether we lose, it's how he plays the game that counts. All part of his Cloward-Piven strategy to tax our society in all directions at once to cause it's collapse! Or toss another log on the fire as someone else has said in here. So deem D.O.M.A. unConstitutional, repeal D.A.D.T., ban oil drilling while in contempt of court, ignore a federal judge and proceed with the implementation of un Constitutional ObamaCare. Whatever it takes for him to win by losing and make his Socialist mentors proud.Let's impeach this son of a beach before it's too late!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Permalink Reply by Mtngrl on -
Elevight said:
Do all of you know that states that have legalized same sex marriage force kids the age of 5 to 7 years old to read a book that shows two men kissing? This is an attempt by the gay movement to desensitize our kids and promote homosexuality.
Good thing you all can't hear me sitting here with my computer. I've been suffering from political tourette syndrome for a few years now.
-
Permalink Reply by james krog on
-
Even if you don't agree with the specific eligibility issue, it is an excellent way to make the point that the president should NOT be supplanting the role of the supreme court. Neither the executive nor the legislative branch should be cherry picking which parts of law should be enforced. The presidents job is to enforce the law and the congress and senate to write the laws and pass them. If the legislative branch doesn't like a law they should either not pass it or repeal it.
And as for social issues they are at the heart of the struggle. If we do not reform society retaking congress and the white house will be a temporary and empty victory.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- …
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
© 2013 Created by Judson Phillips.
