Posted on 05/17/2011 12:27:03 AM PDT by AustralianConservative
For two years now, I’ve warned that the drive for so-called “gay marriage” was the greatest threat to religious liberty we’ve ever faced. But I think I may have underestimated the threat, because now I fear the democratic process and the rule of law are endangered as well.
It was bad enough when the President and the Attorney General declared the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional and would not defend the law of the land in court. Never mind that the DOMA was signed by President Clinton in 1996 after the Senate passed it 85-15 and the House by a margin of 342 to 66!
But after House of Representatives hired the law firm of King and Spalding to represent DOMA in court (since the executive branch wouldn’t), something not-so-funny happened. Gay-rights groups threatened King and Spalding and its commercial clients with boycotts.
In an ethically questionable action, at least under the canon of legal ethics, King and Spalding caved and told the House it would not represent it after all. Instead of criticizing King and Spalding, the media celebrated this as recognition that opposing gay marriage is tantamount to bigotry.
[…]
But hostile criticism and boycotts are one thing. Ignoring federal law is another. Case in point: The Obama administration stopped the deportation order for a gay immigrant because the Justice Department feels that the man could be considered a spouse of another man under U.S. immigration laws. This of course, is nonsense, because under DOMA, the federal government can’t recognize same-sex marriages. But evidently, the law, the will of Congress, and the will of the people don’t matter anymore in the Obama White House -- if the issue at hand is so-called gay “marriage.”
(Excerpt) Read more at crosswalk.com ...
Arguably the Fed should stay out of marriage.
Arguably we have an Executive Branch, Congress and Judicial Branch populated with people who have broken their oath to uphold & defend the Constitution against ALL enemies, both foreign and domestic.
Forget about those preening, self absorbed egotists who call themselves the “Fourth Estate”.
Marriage impacts tax revenue. We have a tax system based on life choices. So the feds would have to get out of that too.
Gay marriage is an oxymoron. It cannot exist other then people pretending it does.
Gays need to stop trying to be straight and quit bullying everyone with emotional blackmail and forcing things through the court system that hurt society as a whole so they can feel good about themselves. They’re gay and need to accept that means certain things that are inescapable, like they aren’t straight.
Americans are very accepting, however they are also very easily manipulated into accepting damaging policy with what they think are good intentions.
Why don’t people just start laughing when people talk about the oxymoron “gay marriage”? It is actually a funny conceit.
If I’m not mistaken, I recall instance where joint filers were being penalized.
It’s the private sector that should enjoy the interpretation of life choices.
Agreed.
I don’t think the government should be involved in marriage.
You wanna get married? Go to your local clergy or whomever and be done with it.
Draw up a contract spelling out the T&C’s.
‘It was bad enough when the President and the Attorney General declared the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional and would not defend the law of the land in court.’
Legitimate grounds for impeachment - not that anyone would ever impeach Premier Hussein, inasmuch as no one even cares that he’s constitutionally ineligible even to hold the office in the first place.
America has become a caricature of its former self under this ossclown. Thank you Democrats and RINOs.
Reynolds v. United States, 1878
The Founders and Framers of our Fundamental Laws recognized three Principles Religion (Christianity) Morality (springing from our Common Christian Religion) and Knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind. James Wilson who once taught american Law-and who signed several important documents-even served as an Associate Justice on the US supreme Court IF I am not mistaken. reflected the Christian biblical model of marriage when he taught that under American Law one consequence of Marriage is “the two become one.” If the Fed should divorce itself entirely from Marriage I would argue they ought stay the H-— out of Morality— Having rejected the founding Religion and Morality (like the Late D.James Kennedy so aptly wrote in How Would Jesus Vote? — “We’ve gotten rid of religion ,and morality,and now we’ve got a problem with knowledge in our schools.We may be dumb Americans,but we sure feel good about ourselves.” I agree with Mr.Colson and cannot be numbered with the Reprobates,deserving of death that attack him for daring to speak Truth.
LOL: Now you’ve come to that conclusion? Yes, perhaps the Fed should stop trying to destroy a pre-political institution, but to protect it will save taxpayers billions.
You’re right. Same-sex couples can’t ever conceive naturally, for starters, whereas most healthy heterosexuals can. Gay marriage is an oxymoron.
I call this “middleclass mirroring” when gay couples try to act like Ken and Barbie. It makes many people cringe (secretly or openly).
you mean like......when the feds made mormons renounce polygamy as condition for Utah to become a state?
“I don’t think the government should be involved in marriage. You wanna get married? Go to your local clergy or whomever and be done with it.”
So that’s why the Founding Fathers supported polygamy and gay marriage? Just kidding. I think that’s a cop out. A society can’t throw more children under the bus. If we can’t protect boys and girls, from social experiments, are we civilized?
Government defines the terms and condition of what constitutes a marriage.
Ergo; John and John are husband and husband.
The government does not need to define or redefine what constitutes a marriage.
People marry for a variety of reasons and stay together for sometimes maddening or bizarre compacts.
If people stop letting the government define your relationship we don’t have to deal with “gay marriage”.
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.