Senate To Consider DOMA Repeal Bill Next Week

Jul 13, 2011 Full story: www.ontopmag.com 48

Next week, a U.S. Senate committee will hold a first-ever hearing on repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act , the 1996 law that bars federal agencies from recognizing the legal marriages of gay and lesbian couples.

Full Story
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“Created Equal”

Since: Feb 08

USA

#1 Jul 13, 2011
They better hurry up and repeal it before it is burned to the ground in not one but two Federal Appeals cases.

Same thing happened to DADT. The appeals court hearing the case granted a stay to give the government time to potentially repeal DADT, which the government did. But when GOP opponents of the repeal began dragging their feet, trying to find ways to delay implementation of repeal and pressuring the military to exempt Chaplains from training... the court said "enough," and issued it's ruling. The court is out of patience now, and has pressed the DOJ to immediately indicate whether it plans to appeal the ruling to SCOTUS, or determine whether congressional legislators in the House intend to mount their own appeal.

All the best minds in the Department of Justice agree that DOMA is unconstitutional under Article IV, Section 1, so if Congress doesn't want to end up looking like a pack constitutionally illiterate wild dogs yet again, they'd better get DOMA repealed, or be prepared to be raked over the constitutional coals in court.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#2 Jul 13, 2011
Once again the Dems in the Senate are a day late & a dollar short.

Too bad they couldn't have brought this up BEFORE the 2010 elections when it might have had a chance of passing in the House.

Now it's just pandering and political posturing- nothing new.
Bringmedinner

San Jose, CA

#3 Jul 13, 2011
The whole cloth of "gay marriage" and subsequent distemper about DOMA is woven from an extreme freeloading minority wanting more ways to milk the system of free money and benefits.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#6 Jul 13, 2011
WeTheSheeple wrote:
Once again the Dems in the Senate are a day late & a dollar short.
Too bad they couldn't have brought this up BEFORE the 2010 elections when it might have had a chance of passing in the House.
Now it's just pandering and political posturing- nothing new.
I'm just cynical enough to believe that Obama and Dems dragged their feet on purpose figuring the courts would toss the law sooner or later and they would have to risk upsetting the pant-wetting, panicking "christians" in their districts.

It's also a plus for the Dems if the courts take care of DOMA because then the Republicans can't use a vote to repeal it against them in the next election cycle.

Bottom line?? A handful of pant-wetting moralists are STILL more important to them than 15 or 20 million gay folks.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#7 Jul 13, 2011
ScottyMatic wrote:
They better hurry up and repeal it before it is burned to the ground in not one but two Federal Appeals cases.
Same thing happened to DADT. The appeals court hearing the case granted a stay to give the government time to potentially repeal DADT, which the government did. But when GOP opponents of the repeal began dragging their feet, trying to find ways to delay implementation of repeal and pressuring the military to exempt Chaplains from training... the court said "enough," and issued it's ruling. The court is out of patience now, and has pressed the DOJ to immediately indicate whether it plans to appeal the ruling to SCOTUS, or determine whether congressional legislators in the House intend to mount their own appeal.
All the best minds in the Department of Justice agree that DOMA is unconstitutional under Article IV, Section 1, so if Congress doesn't want to end up looking like a pack constitutionally illiterate wild dogs yet again, they'd better get DOMA repealed, or be prepared to be raked over the constitutional coals in court.
Great posy once again Scotty. For those on these threads that don't know what Article 4 Sec. 1 is, it's the Full Faith a Credit clause. It's basic purpose was and is to tell the States they have to play nice with each other of someone is calling their Mother! Mom being the Federal Government. And if Mom gets called then Dad steps in (the courts).

Most folks my age know that when Mom says, wait till I tell your Father, we were in for a real spanking! I am so tired of the crap being spread these days with buzzwords and phrases like "original intent" and "activist judges".

IMO we've become a Nation of spoiled whining children. My generation was fed values like honor and respect, but also question authority and free thinking. Success was measured by money and power. Words like "Conservative" and "Liberal" have lost their true meaning and have become trendy insults for the children to toss around the playground (and I'm not referring to those under 18 when I say children). The word "Socialism" is a good example as well. It became the Battle cry for the Tea Party but now they want to keep all the "social programs" they grew up under. Perhaps I should start a grassroots movement and call it the Coffee Party! I already have the few planks for my "platform". "Wake up America" and "Don't pass any laws you can't or won't enforce."

It's time we woke up and stopped being so gullible and selfish. Instead of stressing Shakespeare and facts, dates and names from History, I'd push for schools to begin teaching civics early. Students need to be taught better history and a better understanding of the how's and why's our Nation was formed and grew. I'd love to see them have to pass a test on George Washington's Farewell Address to the Nation.

IMO most the people elected in the last 40 years probably never even read it.

But I digress. I'm glad the Senate is picking up the ball and holding these hearings. We've wasted too much money on politicians and lawyers fighting over turning this Nation into a Theocracy.

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#8 Jul 13, 2011
post not posy. sorry. My spell check needs a good cleaning and an upgrade. If any computer geeks have hints please message me using the topix message feature.Thanks
Frank Stanton

New York, NY

#9 Jul 13, 2011
WeTheSheeple wrote:
Once again the Dems in the Senate are a day late & a dollar short.
Too bad they couldn't have brought this up BEFORE the 2010 elections when it might have had a chance of passing in the House.
Now it's just pandering and political posturing- nothing new.
I agree.

In addition to that, it's obvious Clinton KNEW it was unconstitutional when he signed it, and not surprisingly he was pandering when he signe dit into law.

THANK GOD we impeached him !

:)

We impached TWO (2) DEMOCRATIC Presidents !

Can we do it again ?!

YES, We Can !

:)
hoodathunkit

Bellefontaine, OH

#10 Jul 13, 2011
Bringmedinner wrote:
The whole cloth of "gay marriage" and subsequent distemper about DOMA is woven from an extreme freeloading minority wanting more ways to milk the system of free money and benefits.
The whole cloth of your post is woven from extreme stupidity and has nothing to do with the truth. Just how is gay marriage related to a freeloading minority wanting more ways to milk the system of free money and benefits?

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#11 Jul 13, 2011
Bringmedinner wrote:
The whole cloth of "gay marriage" and subsequent distemper about DOMA is woven from an extreme freeloading minority wanting more ways to milk the system of free money and benefits.
we are gay and lesbians not Congress and State Legislators. You also have us confused with a lot of Non Profit political organizations intent on turning this Nation into a Theocracy.

Have you ever actually read the WHOLE U.S. Constitution? Or would that interfere in barking to wifey for another beer?

DNF

“Judge more and you love less”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH-Baltimore MD-S.Fla

#12 Jul 13, 2011
Bringmedinner wrote:
The whole cloth of "gay marriage" and subsequent distemper about DOMA is woven from an extreme freeloading minority wanting more ways to milk the system of free money and benefits.
I do have to thank you for one thing. I now understand why they call them "smart phones" and why we now have to order a hamburger by a number.

"Hey there's an app for that"!

ROFLMAO

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#13 Jul 13, 2011
Frank Stanton wrote:
<quoted text>....it's obvious Clinton KNEW it was unconstitutional when he signed it, and not surprisingly he was pandering when he signe dit into law....
It's obvious because CLINTON SAID SO when he was signing it!

And he wasn't pandering (that's the job of Republicans and Libertarians, not Democrats), he was trying (successfully, I might add) to stop the impending title waive of panic in the country that was revving up to get a FEDERAL marriage amendment passed. At the time, it was highly likely that it would have passed.

Clinton knew he was signing unconstitutional legislation, but knew it was his only way to stop the panicking idiots. And it worked.

So perhaps you could regale us all with stories of all the good things our Libertarian presidents have done for the GLBT community. Oops!!! What was that??? Oh, yeah. There haven't been any.....
Frank Stanton

New York, NY

#14 Jul 13, 2011
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
It's obvious because CLINTON SAID SO when he was signing it!
And he wasn't pandering (that's the job of Republicans and Libertarians, not Democrats), he was trying (successfully, I might add) to stop the impending title waive of panic in the country that was revving up to get a FEDERAL marriage amendment passed. At the time, it was highly likely that it would have passed.
Clinton knew he was signing unconstitutional legislation, but knew it was his only way to stop the panicking idiots. And it worked.
So perhaps you could regale us all with stories of all the good things our Libertarian presidents have done for the GLBT community. Oops!!! What was that??? Oh, yeah. There haven't been any.....
So you admire an IMPEACHED President ?! I gather you're also a member of the "Andrew Johnson Fan Club".
hoodathunkit

Bellefontaine, OH

#15 Jul 13, 2011
Frank Stanton wrote:
<quoted text>
So you admire an IMPEACHED President ?! I gather you're also a member of the "Andrew Johnson Fan Club".
So you wish Clinton had vetoed DOMA and congress had pushed through a federal marriage amendment?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#16 Jul 13, 2011
Frank Stanton wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree.
In addition to that, it's obvious Clinton KNEW it was unconstitutional when he signed it, and not surprisingly he was pandering when he signe dit into law.
THANK GOD we impeached him !
:)
We impached TWO (2) DEMOCRATIC Presidents !
Can we do it again ?!
YES, We Can !
:)
Actually Clinton signed DOMA knowing a future court would indeed find it unconstitutional. That was his intent, because by doing so he prevented the GOPasaurs from getting enough votes to amend the constitution to ban same-sex marriages. A constitutional ban would have easily been ratified by 3/4 of the states in 1996. That would have been much harder to overturn.

Obama is being just as crafty in his repeal/defense of DADT.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#17 Jul 13, 2011
hoodathunkit wrote:
<quoted text>
The whole cloth of your post is woven from extreme stupidity and has nothing to do with the truth. Just how is gay marriage related to a freeloading minority wanting more ways to milk the system of free money and benefits?
I think he was talking about the minority of heteros who manage to stay married past 5 years and all the free money & benefits they've been sucking from the taxpayers in the form of tax credits & pension benefits, etc.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#18 Jul 13, 2011
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
It's obvious because CLINTON SAID SO when he was signing it!
And he wasn't pandering (that's the job of Republicans and Libertarians, not Democrats), he was trying (successfully, I might add) to stop the impending title waive of panic in the country that was revving up to get a FEDERAL marriage amendment passed. At the time, it was highly likely that it would have passed.
Clinton knew he was signing unconstitutional legislation, but knew it was his only way to stop the panicking idiots. And it worked.
So perhaps you could regale us all with stories of all the good things our Libertarian presidents have done for the GLBT community. Oops!!! What was that??? Oh, yeah. There haven't been any.....
Sorry, I didn't realize you beat me to the stick with which you clubbed Frank over the head once again! Well done. It's like a tag-team wrestling match. Time to give Frankie a pile driver!!

“Think,does it help or hurt ?”

Since: Dec 08

"Anyone Seen The Dude"

#19 Jul 13, 2011
Frank Stanton wrote:
<quoted text>
So you admire an IMPEACHED President ?! I gather you're also a member of the "Andrew Johnson Fan Club".
Yeah,impeached for getting a B.J. behind the desk in the oval office! Big frikking deal! Every president in history would have been impeached under the same circumstances if back in the day they gave a flying fuque! The question should have never come up! How many millions of tax payer money wasted on this fiasco? Get over it!
Frank Stanton

New York, NY

#20 Jul 13, 2011
hoodathunkit wrote:
<quoted text>
So you wish Clinton had vetoed DOMA and congress had pushed through a federal marriage amendment?
Congress CANNOT "push thru an amendment". You need a minimum of 2/3 of the House and 2/3 of the Senate to approve it, and then it gets sent to the states, where 3/4 of the 99 legislative bodies would have to approve it by simple majority vote. It wasn't going to happen, and it isn't going to happen.
Frank Stanton

New York, NY

#21 Jul 13, 2011
The last time an amendment to the U.S. Constitution was voted on, back in the 90's, it failed in the Senate.(Mark Hatfield was the lone Senator that killed it).

It's nearly impossible nowadays to ratify a U.S. Constitutional Amendment, even when there are GOOD amendments that SHOULD be passed by congress and ratified by the states, such as the Crime Victim's Amendment and the Balanced Budget Amendment (and my Don't Let The Democrats Run For Political Office Amendment).

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#22 Jul 13, 2011
Frank Stanton wrote:
<quoted text>
Congress CANNOT "push thru an amendment". You need a minimum of 2/3 of the House and 2/3 of the Senate to approve it, and then it gets sent to the states, where 3/4 of the 99 legislative bodies would have to approve it by simple majority vote. It wasn't going to happen, and it isn't going to happen.
DOMA passed with WAY more than the 2/3 votes needed in both the House & Senate. It is HIGHLY likely that the 2/3 votes were there for a marriage amendment.

Currently 41 states ban marriage for same-sex couples either by statute or constitutional amendment. That is MORE than the 38 states required for ratification of a federal constitutional amendment.

So it is VERY likely that in 1996 or shortly thereafter the anti-gay marriage hysteria would have led to a successful federal marriage amendment banning same-sex couples from marrying.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Patrick Leahy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Not much chance of Congress stopping Cuba policy 20 hr Doc Proper 37
Senator: USAID's Cuba hip-hop project 'reckless' Dec 13 Sterkfontein Swar... 2
Senator: USAID's Cuba hip-hop project 'reckless' Dec 12 Numero UNO 1
Comcast to U.S. senator: no plans to create Int... Nov '14 Kid_Tomorrow 52
Verizon promises no Internet a fast lanesa Oct '14 Kid_Tomorrow 1
NSA surveillance limits: The focus turns to courts Oct '14 Asian Guy 1
Senator Asks Comcast to Forswear Fast Lanes on ... Oct '14 harvinedhalmon 1
More from around the web