Posted on 03/01/2013 2:10:56 PM PST by SeekAndFind
In an impromptu White House press conference on Friday, President Barack Obama spoke on his administration's recent decision to file an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to strike down Proposition 8, saying there is "no good reason" for a ban on same-sex marriage. He was responding to a reporter who asked the president why he doesn't "just argue that marriage is a right that should be available to all people of this country."
Obama responded by saying: "What we've said is that same-sex couples are a group, a class that deserves heightened scrutiny. The Supreme Court needs to ask the state why it's doing it, and if the state doesn't have a good reason, it should be struck down. That's the core principle, as applied to this case.
"Now, what the court may decide that if it doesn't apply in this case, it probably can't apply in any case. There's no good reason for it. If I were on the court, that would probably be the view that I would put forward. But I'm not a judge, I'm the president."
He continued, "The basic principle, though, is let's treat everybody fairly, let's treat everybody equally, and – and I think that the brief that's been presented accurately reflects our views."
Obama also told reporters at Friday's press conference that he felt it was important for his administration to become involved in the Proposition 8 case because he found the amendment that was passed by voters in 2008 to be unconstitutional. The amendment defines marriage as between a man and a woman.
"... when the Supreme Court asks, do you think that the California law, which doesn't provide any rationale for discriminating against same-sex couples other than just the notion that, well, they're same-sex couples, if the Supreme Court asks me or my Attorney General or Solicitor General, do we think that meets constitutional muster, I felt it was important for us to answer that question honestly – and the answer is no," Obama told reporters. The Obama administration filed its amicus brief late Thursday, the last day for briefs to be filed in the Supreme Court case.
"The exclusion of gay and lesbian couples from marriage does not substantially further any important governmental interest. Proposition 8 thus violates equal protection," wrote Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. in the brief favoring the overturning of Proposition 8 in California.
Obama, who initially took office supporting civil unions but not same-sex marriage, came out in support of its legalization last year.
Many critics note Obama has previously stated that he does not believe in federal intervention regarding same-sex marriage, and that it is an issue which should be left to state jurisdiction.
In a statement to ABC News, Andy Pugno, general counsel for ProtectMarriage.com, a proponent of Proposition 8, called Obama's brief "unprecedented" and "hardly surprising, but nevertheless disturbing."
"In his first term as president, Obama clearly stated that Americans can choose a special designation of marriage between man and woman, and that supporters of traditional marriage can hold that position without animus," the statement on behalf of Protectmarriage.com read, according to ABC News.
"He later remarked that it would be a 'mistake' to make the debate over redefining marriage into a federal issue," the statement continued.
"Yet today, by stating that the traditional definition of marriage is rooted only in irrational prejudice, the president has impugned the motives and actions of millions of Californians and turned his back on society's long-standing interest in both mothers and fathers raising the next generation."
Opening arguments for the Supreme Court Proposition 8 case will be heard March 26.
During this term, the Supreme Court will also be hearing a case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as being between one man and one woman on a federal level.
“The basic principle, though, is let’s treat everybody fairly, let’s treat everybody equally, and – and I think that the brief that’s been presented accurately reflects our views.”
Good because I want to marry my sister (I’m also a woman). You can’t judge me, everybody has to be treated equally!
My guess is that in Obama’s new math, a Nation full of votes does not out weigh a Dictators decree...
...Kinda like how he got elected.
With all the Bigmouth talking, everybody forgets that gay marriage is sexual perversion. It is wrong at the outset. I wish he would shut up. He is such a distraction to everything people are trying to have a serious discussion about. All he does is talk!
In America, the Executive Branch does not “strike down”.
Unless you are assuming dictatorial powers.
Which, considering 0bama’s unwillingness to enforce the laws as required by the Constitution, has already occurred.
See immigration law, release of illegals, etc.
Obama wants to marry Reggie when he dumps the mooose after the next election.
My FRiend he is half black,
That is his trump. They will never desert him.
Skin color trumps everything in the Democratic party.
How’s he going to explain this to his good buddies in the Muslim Brotherhood?
Anyone with a modicum of sense knew he supported gay marriage all along, and the homosexuals knew that too. They knew he was saying that because many people in the country are/were opposed to gay marriage. There were more people opposed when he first ran than there are now. (One must hand it to the libs and homosexual community; they utilized the media and schools to switch public opinion.) He paid lip service to traditional marriage on the surface, but he has always supported gay marriage. Now he feels comfortable revealing his true feelings.
Oh, really? On whose authority will Obama do this?
He must have gotten a truck load of letters from him bath house and gay bar buds.
What nobody ever says, is that marriage is NOT an issue of “equal protection” at all.
Why? Because under current marriage law, we’re all treated equally. We are all limited to one opposite sex partner. We are all limited to one marriage partner at a time. Any eligible man can marry any eligible woman, and vice versa. We’re all treated equally as it is.
I understand that a homosexual doesn’t want to marry an opposite sex partner, but the point is, he/she has the right to do so.
Another issue is that, under federal law, homosexuality and this whole “sexual identity” issue is not a protected class under civil rights laws. Yet judges are being asked to invent such a right, and then apply that right to say that homosexuals should have the right to marry each other.
Bottom line, this issue should not be in courts at all. And it wouldn’t have made inroads in courts except for liberal judges inventing a right to homosexual marriage, and deciding that “sexual orientation” “SHOULD BE” covered under civil rights laws, when such status is explicity NOT covered at all.
Same sex married people are BANNED from my house.
Strike that down!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.