In 1870, the department of justice was charged with enforcing and defending federal law. Obama and Holder have willfully chosen not to do that and Obama should be impeached. It is not his call nor is it Holder's to say DOMA is unconstitutional ... that is the court's. Until then, they are to perform the duties accorded to them.
I almost thought this guys were going to have an intelligent conversation about DOMA. Especially in the analyse of the laws constitutionality and the Presidents right to not defend all laws. Then they went off on the Sarah Palin tangent. I will not add anything to what others have said here except to say, these guys have fallen into the belief that Palin is being picked on, even though she literally falls apart in any kind of real hard analysis.
@edgwaterprog Be careful of the word 'literally'. I wish Sarah Palin WOULD actually collapse into tiny bits under interrogation but she is still whole and walking about, alas.
Obama has placed himself above God when he said DOMA is unconstitutional don't this so-called constitutional scholar know that he could bring a curse upon our nation when he disobeys the word of God.(Genesis 2:24,Matthew 19:4-6,Mark 10:5-9,Deuteronomy 27:26,Jeremiah 11:3,Galatians 3:10).
@MrEschatologist What does the Constitution have to do with the sections for the Bilble you indicated? Have they been incorporated as part of the Constitution? The last time I checked the Constitution does not mention any scripture let alone these.
@MrEschatologist You do know that your references are as meaningless to me as the Tibetan book of the Dead. Would you like me to quite the Talmud to you? Or perhaps the Bhagavad Gita? Or Dianetics? The dictates of your cult are of no interest to me, the taxpayer.
The hypocrite Newt merely wants to feed the frothy anti-gay base, thus set himself up for a prez run come-back. Thrice-married, twice-divorced adulterous Newt upholding "traditional marriage?" What a joke.
@seahorse05 Fothy anti-gay? Might you be talking about santorum?
I agree, I am really not sure how much Newt would have to do to get these wing-nuts to admit he is immoral and unqualified for higher office. In fact if he were a democrat, they would insist that he is not appropriate for any kind of public office, or position of influence. But hey, Republicans and rightwing Christians have a very high tollerance for hypocrisy.
@steerpike66 The reason that SCOTUS decisions are called "opinions" is that the Congress trumps the Supreme Court. While we are taught that concept of Judicial Review gave the Court the final authority in the 1803 decision of Marbury v Madison, President Jefferson over rode the opinion of the court, by not delivering Marbury's appointment as a Federal judge. President from Jefferson, Jackson, FDR and a couple others have ignored SCOTUS opinions with impunity!
@steerpike66 Actually the only thing this legal commentator is willing to admit is the portion of DOMA that regulates interstate commerce is unconstitutional. I suspect that he believes that other portions of DOMA, especially the ones that permit the Federal Government to discriminate against same-sex couples, are is constitutional. So the law may not be going down, but it does mean that ALL states would have to accept ALL marriages conducted in other states. And that is a very big deal!
Roe vs. Wade is a Supreme Court decision. DOMA is a law. The comparison is seriously stupid. The president can say that the Supreme Court made the wrong decision on something, but that's just an opinion. Obama not defending DOMA is a totally separate area of law. And this Newt person wants to be president?
I don't recall Obama EVER saying that he supported DOMA. Also Row v. Wade was a Supreme Court decision, not a law passed by Congress. Big difference. One is settled law, the other is not. You are also implying that Obama will not enforce DOMA. That is not true. DOMA is still the law of the land.
Marriage is a right that they cannot legislate.
LER77 8 months ago
The Defense of Marriage Act is Unconstitutional, period
zomboy4 9 months ago
sarah palin will never be president stop with the hypotheticals
chipatzuwa 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In 1870, the department of justice was charged with enforcing and defending federal law. Obama and Holder have willfully chosen not to do that and Obama should be impeached. It is not his call nor is it Holder's to say DOMA is unconstitutional ... that is the court's. Until then, they are to perform the duties accorded to them.
jgehb 11 months ago
my prayers for Mr. steerpike the queer comes from Acts 13:11
MrEschatologist 11 months ago
I almost thought this guys were going to have an intelligent conversation about DOMA. Especially in the analyse of the laws constitutionality and the Presidents right to not defend all laws. Then they went off on the Sarah Palin tangent. I will not add anything to what others have said here except to say, these guys have fallen into the belief that Palin is being picked on, even though she literally falls apart in any kind of real hard analysis.
edgwaterprog 11 months ago
Comment removed
steerpike66 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@edgwaterprog Be careful of the word 'literally'. I wish Sarah Palin WOULD actually collapse into tiny bits under interrogation but she is still whole and walking about, alas.
steerpike66 11 months ago
Obama has placed himself above God when he said DOMA is unconstitutional don't this so-called constitutional scholar know that he could bring a curse upon our nation when he disobeys the word of God.(Genesis 2:24,Matthew 19:4-6,Mark 10:5-9,Deuteronomy 27:26,Jeremiah 11:3,Galatians 3:10).
MrEschatologist 11 months ago
@MrEschatologist What does the Constitution have to do with the sections for the Bilble you indicated? Have they been incorporated as part of the Constitution? The last time I checked the Constitution does not mention any scripture let alone these.
edgwaterprog 11 months ago
@MrEschatologist You do know that your references are as meaningless to me as the Tibetan book of the Dead. Would you like me to quite the Talmud to you? Or perhaps the Bhagavad Gita? Or Dianetics? The dictates of your cult are of no interest to me, the taxpayer.
steerpike66 11 months ago
@MrEschatologist
AOF:
Another
Old
Fart
steerpike66 11 months ago
The hypocrite Newt merely wants to feed the frothy anti-gay base, thus set himself up for a prez run come-back. Thrice-married, twice-divorced adulterous Newt upholding "traditional marriage?" What a joke.
seahorse05 1 year ago 2
@seahorse05 Fothy anti-gay? Might you be talking about santorum?
I agree, I am really not sure how much Newt would have to do to get these wing-nuts to admit he is immoral and unqualified for higher office. In fact if he were a democrat, they would insist that he is not appropriate for any kind of public office, or position of influence. But hey, Republicans and rightwing Christians have a very high tollerance for hypocrisy.
edgwaterprog 11 months ago
SIGNING STATEMENTS!
maxx1000 1 year ago
@maxx1000 Yes, thank-you.
edgwaterprog 11 months ago
Comment removed
steerpike66 1 year ago 2
@steerpike66 The reason that SCOTUS decisions are called "opinions" is that the Congress trumps the Supreme Court. While we are taught that concept of Judicial Review gave the Court the final authority in the 1803 decision of Marbury v Madison, President Jefferson over rode the opinion of the court, by not delivering Marbury's appointment as a Federal judge. President from Jefferson, Jackson, FDR and a couple others have ignored SCOTUS opinions with impunity!
Ragfish 1 year ago
RIGHT! So even the extreme right admits that DOMA is a violation of the constitution.
This law is going DOWN
steerpike66 1 year ago
@steerpike66 Actually the only thing this legal commentator is willing to admit is the portion of DOMA that regulates interstate commerce is unconstitutional. I suspect that he believes that other portions of DOMA, especially the ones that permit the Federal Government to discriminate against same-sex couples, are is constitutional. So the law may not be going down, but it does mean that ALL states would have to accept ALL marriages conducted in other states. And that is a very big deal!
edgwaterprog 11 months ago
Roe vs. Wade is a Supreme Court decision. DOMA is a law. The comparison is seriously stupid. The president can say that the Supreme Court made the wrong decision on something, but that's just an opinion. Obama not defending DOMA is a totally separate area of law. And this Newt person wants to be president?
tn7787 1 year ago
Hey everyone it's "Roe" not "Row"
cryptosquid 1 year ago
Comment removed
drydeniv 1 year ago
Obama never supported DOMA, he opposed it throughout the 2008 campaign, so there was no flip-flop from him.
Bad analogy about Palin not deffending Row v. Wade, since it was a Supreme Court decision, not a law passed by Congress.
newkillerstardust 1 year ago 7
Row v Wade is not a law passed by congress... The analogy is just off.
conor143 1 year ago 3
I don't recall Obama EVER saying that he supported DOMA. Also Row v. Wade was a Supreme Court decision, not a law passed by Congress. Big difference. One is settled law, the other is not. You are also implying that Obama will not enforce DOMA. That is not true. DOMA is still the law of the land.
hbfarker 1 year ago 8