Skip to comments.Obama urges Supreme Court to strike down federal Defense of Marriage Act
Posted on 02/23/2013 8:11:22 PM PST by RoosterRedux
The Obama administration is asking the Supreme Court to strike down the federal law defining marriage as a union between only a man and a woman.
The request regarding the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act was made Friday in a brief by Solicitor General Donald Verrilli that argues the law is unconstitutional because it violates "the fundamental guarantee of equal protection."
The high court is set to hear two cases next month on the issue: the constitutional challenge on Proposition 8, the 2008 California that allowed same-sex marriages in the state that two years later was overturned, and United States v. Windsor, which challenges DOMA.
Edith Windsor, a California resident, was married to her female partner in Canada in 2007 but was required to pay roughly $360,000 in federal estate taxes because the marriage is not recognized under DOMA.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
When did Freepers become so insulting to one another? I remember when people on here had civilized discussions and even when they disagreed, they were respectful and polite. Has Obama turned us all into rude, short-tempered, obnoxious little jerks?
Obama is the only unconstitutional element in the case. This court case is simply his outrage of the day, today an assault upon an institution created by God as a sacred relationship between man and woman, instituted for the purpose of creating family and procreation in a loving supporting social environment.
Eventually the Creator will tire of being taken in vain by these communists, and then will mete out justice with mercy upon those who deny the
Lord and his teaching - remember the first miracle was at Cana.
This is no matter for resolution in legislation and court challenge. This action is an assault on our God given freedoms and His establishment of life on the earth. God will handle the cultural relativism outrage at a personal level with those promoting blasphemy. Believe it.
Direct your question to the arrogant and condescending poster,10th Amendment.
I’m sure you were here during the presidential primaries. I left for awhile, I didn’t think my skin was thick enough to stay..
Just doesn’t seem the same as several years ago. We are supposed to be on the same side, but you wouldn’t know it by some of the posts on here. Sad.
10th Amendment was merely giving you factual, provable information. The vitriol is coming entirely from you and others criticizing him. Perhaps he was condescending to you, but if so that appears to have been the proper approach to take to you since you have nothing but personal insults with which to rebut him.
Are we to believe that a marriage would have $360,000 in tax relief... or is this just the total taxes she has paid period?
Well then Donald, it is now also time for you to submit a brief that argues 0bamacare is unconstitutional because it VIOLATES "the fundamental guarantee of equal protection".
Socialist cronies of Barack get 0bamacare waivers while Hobby Lobby takes its economically-harmful and freedom-killing provisions in the a**.
Where is the justice?! Where is the equal protection?!
Equal protection does not wash either because a homosexual being has the same right as a heterosexual being in regards of having the same opportunity to marry someone of the opposite sex (DNA not sowed on or cut off genitals).
My take, cut every Federal spousal benefit, get rid of the Social Security Act, Medicare/Medicaid, Federal Welfare programs and streamline the tax laws if the majority (Judges) thinks the Federal gov. should stay out of the marriage business. Of course consistency in our government is severely lacking, mainly do the the ignorance of the "common mans" barking/begging like a trained seal for scraps that representatives throw at them.
Sodom did not stand forever. God struck it down.
You might be flamed but I reluctantly agree. Besides the X Amendment there is the full faith and credit clause. In the 40s, 50s and early 60s partners seeking divorce ended up in Reno Nev. States like NY which recognized adultery and physical abuse as the only reasons for dissolution of the marriage still had to recognize Nevada divorces when the parties returned to NY. The purpose of DOMA was to allow states the cover of federal statute if the will of the legislature or polity did not want to accept same sex marriage when those same sex partners returned or moved to their state.
> If the primary argument here is equal protection, would
> that not also open a clear legal path for incestuous
> marriage and polygamy?
Yes, as well as polyamory, which is multiple marriage among as many genders as the government recognizes.
And don’t forget pedophilic and bestial marriages, even marriages to blowup dolls.
This is “factual, provable” and not “vitriol”??
Quote from OP:
“The joke is on patriots who don’t bother to read the Constitution.”
The movement started in Babylon California. It has become so wide spread (like a plague), nature and the God of nature will correct it. AIDs was designed by nature to cleanse the disease, but man kind got in the way. Nature will choose a stronger course this time.
I don't think the coastal regions of California will last past this summer, because the nations children are being dragged into this abomination. I see a massive wave coming to cleanse it. No more fooling around. The plates are starting to shrug like crazy already.
God designed nature to cleanse itself, and no man can war with the forces of nature. Nature always wins.
Do you know if that is real or photoshopped?
LOL! Funny but not funny.. I thought the same thing. Roberts is a turncoat sissy la-la. The nerve of 0bama to do this, but what else would we expect from our first black, Marxist Muslim gay illegal alien president!
There is no secular argument against gay marriage. The problem with conservatism is that it becoming more and more secular.
..and you’ve heard too that Orly Taitz says the clerks at SCOTUS did NOT forward critical exhibits of hers to 5 of the Justices!