Federal In Defense Of Marriage Act Deemed Unconstitutional

Discussion in 'Up to the Minute' started by believe09, Jul 8, 2010.

  1. believe09

    believe09 Active Member

    Messages:
    28,114
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    38
  2. Loading...


  3. Angels_Not_Forgotten

    Angels_Not_Forgotten Anxiously Awaiting a WINNING NFL Season!

    Messages:
    1,750
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Thank you so much for this link! The button was not thanks enough for me!!
     
  4. Steely Dan

    Steely Dan Former Member

    Messages:
    30,559
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Andrea Lafferty, executive director of the Traditional Values Coalition, called Tauro's ruling "judicial activism" and said Tauro was a "rogue judge." Gay marriage advocates will keep pushing their agenda in the courts, she said, but noted voters consistently have rejected gay marriage at the ballot box, including in a recent California vote.

    "We can't allow the lowest common denominator states, like Massachusetts, to set standards for the country," Lafferty said.

    Tom McClusky, senior vice president of the conservative Family Research Council, said the rulings result in part from "the deliberately weak legal defense of DOMA" that the Obama administration mounted on behalf of the government.

    "While the American people have made it unmistakably clear that they want to preserve marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman, liberals and activist judges are not content to let the people decide," McClusky said in a statement.


    Activist Judge = Judge I don't agree with. :rolleyes:
     
  5. believe09

    believe09 Active Member

    Messages:
    28,114
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Lowest common denominator state??? That has to be the most pompous divisive phrase I have read in a long, long time lol. I like it!!
     
  6. Steely Dan

    Steely Dan Former Member

    Messages:
    30,559
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I love the "east coast intellectual" haters. There are 13 stripes on the flag that represent the 13 original colonies. They were all east coast. The continental congress was full of east coast intellectuals and yet so many believe they know better than judges and people with compassion and brains. JMO
     
  7. southcitymom

    southcitymom New Member

    Messages:
    16,021
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
  8. WhyaDuck?

    WhyaDuck? Inactive

    Messages:
    16,781
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0

    (BTW, love your new "location".)
     
  9. MrsT

    MrsT New Member

    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hopefully this is a step in the right directions for the entire country!
     
  10. greenbean

    greenbean New Member

    Messages:
    240
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wow. Bout-freakin'-time.
     
  11. punkinpie

    punkinpie Inactive

    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree...it's about time. But has anyone else seen this? Why would the Obama Administration appeal the ruling?

    "President Obama has called the law known as DOMA “abhorrent” and pledged to overturn it. But his Justice Department has defended the law’s constitutionality in court – and is expected to appeal Judge Tauro’s ruling to the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit."

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/313432
     
  12. MargotKidder

    MargotKidder New Member

    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I really enjoyed reading the opinion of Judge Tauro, it was completely LOGICAL!

    This was my favorite part of his ruling:

    In the wake of DOMA, it is only sexual orientation that differentiates a married couple entitled to federal marriage-based benefits from one not so entitled. And this court can conceive of no way in which such a difference might be relevant to the provision of the benefits at issue.By premising eligibility for these benefits on marital status in the first instance, the federal government signals to this court that the relevant distinction to be drawn is between married individuals and unmarried individuals. To further divide the class of married individuals into those with spouses of the same sex and those with spouses of the opposite sex is to create a distinction without meaning. And where, as here, “there is no reason to believe that the disadvantaged class is different, in relevant respects” from a similarly situated class, this court may conclude that it is only irrational prejudice that motivates the challenged classification.As irrational prejudice plainly never constitutes a legitimate government interest, this court must hold that Section 3 of DOMA as applied to Plaintiffs violates the equal protection principles embodied in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

    It was nice to have some good news after Linda Lingle's cop-out!

    Thank you, Judge Tauro!
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice