Thread: Obama DOJ compares gay marriage to incest

Friday, June 12, 2009

Obama DOJ lies to Politico in defending hate brief against gays

by John Aravosis (DC) on 6/12/2009 01:26:00 PM
Ben Smith at Politico just reported the following statement from the Department of Justice over their brief, filed last night, comparing gay marriage to incest:

As it generally does with existing statutes, the Justice Department is defending the law on the books in court. The president has said he wants to see a legislative repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act because it prevents LGBT couples from being granted equal rights and benefits. However, until Congress passes legislation repealing the law, the administration will continue to defend the statute when it is challenged in the justice system.Yeah, you see, that's an outright lie. Fortunately for you, and unfortunately for Justice, Joe and I are both lawyers. We suspected this betrayal was coming, so we read up on the law. In fact, George W. Bush (ACLU et al., v. Norman Y. Mineta - "The U.S. Department of Justice has notified Congress that it will not defend a law prohibiting the display of marijuana policy reform ads in public transit systems."), Bill Clinton (Dickerson v. United States - "Because the Miranda decision is of constitutional dimension, Congress may not legislate a contrary rule unless this Court were to overrule Miranda.... Section 3501 cannot constitutionally authorize the admission of a statement that would be excluded under this Court's Miranda cases."), George HW Bush (Metro Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission), and Ronald Reagan (INS v./ Chadha - "Chadha then filed a petition for review of the deportation order in the Court of Appeals, and the INS joined him in arguing that § 244(c)(2) is unconstitutional.") all joined in lawsuits opposing federal laws that they didn't like, laws that they felt were unconstitutional. It is an outright lie to suggest that the DOJ had no choice.

But it's worse than that. Let's just assume for a moment that the Justice spokesman didn't lie to Politico, even though they did. Let's just assume that Obama had no choice but to oppose the gay couple filing this DOMA lawsuit. Where in the law does it say that Obama was required to compare gay marriage to incest?

AMERICAblog News| A great nation deserves the truth: Obama DOJ lies to Politico in defending hate brief against gays

I guess barack Obama is a homo-phobe...eh leftists?

Con:

I was roundly criticized by this sites leftists for commenting that hetro, homosexuals, pedophiles, those who engage in sex with animals and objects all make choices as to what they have sex with. Now Barack Obama's department of Justice has made a direct comparision of gays with those who engage in incest...what say you leftists?

Trust me, the left is not happy about this. In fact, we aren't happy about a lot of things. Things are changing. Just don't expect us to get all up in arms over your issues, because we don't care about them, but when Dick Cheney is to the left of Obama on an issue like gay marriage, there's a big problem.

Originally Posted by Blueneck

Trust me, the left is not happy about this. In fact, we aren't happy about a lot of things. Things are changing. Just don't expect us to get all up in arms over your issues, because we don't care about them, but when Dick Cheney is to the left of Obama on an issue like gay marriage, there's a big problem.

I don't care if they agree with me or not....I just love watching the left meltdown!

Democrats=Republicans

"Change" and "Hope" are an illusion. We need to rid ourselves of 95 to 99% of all politicians in washington.

Originally Posted by conservative

I don't care if they agree with me or not....I just love watching the left meltdown!

Democrats=Republicans

"Change" and "Hope" are an illusion. We need to rid ourselves of 95 to 99% of all politicians in washington.

Yup!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by conservative

Friday, June 12, 2009

Obama DOJ lies to Politico in defending hate brief against gays

by John Aravosis (DC) on 6/12/2009 01:26:00 PM
Ben Smith at Politico just reported the following statement from the Department of Justice over their brief, filed last night, comparing gay marriage to incest:

As it generally does with existing statutes, the Justice Department is defending the law on the books in court. The president has said he wants to see a legislative repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act because it prevents LGBT couples from being granted equal rights and benefits. However, until Congress passes legislation repealing the law, the administration will continue to defend the statute when it is challenged in the justice system.Yeah, you see, that's an outright lie. Fortunately for you, and unfortunately for Justice, Joe and I are both lawyers. We suspected this betrayal was coming, so we read up on the law. In fact, George W. Bush (ACLU et al., v. Norman Y. Mineta - "The U.S. Department of Justice has notified Congress that it will not defend a law prohibiting the display of marijuana policy reform ads in public transit systems."), Bill Clinton (Dickerson v. United States - "Because the Miranda decision is of constitutional dimension, Congress may not legislate a contrary rule unless this Court were to overrule Miranda.... Section 3501 cannot constitutionally authorize the admission of a statement that would be excluded under this Court's Miranda cases."), George HW Bush (Metro Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission), and Ronald Reagan (INS v./ Chadha - "Chadha then filed a petition for review of the deportation order in the Court of Appeals, and the INS joined him in arguing that § 244(c)(2) is unconstitutional.") all joined in lawsuits opposing federal laws that they didn't like, laws that they felt were unconstitutional. It is an outright lie to suggest that the DOJ had no choice.

But it's worse than that. Let's just assume for a moment that the Justice spokesman didn't lie to Politico, even though they did. Let's just assume that Obama had no choice but to oppose the gay couple filing this DOMA lawsuit. Where in the law does it say that Obama was required to compare gay marriage to incest?

AMERICAblog News| A great nation deserves the truth: Obama DOJ lies to Politico in defending hate brief against gays

I guess barack Obama is a homo-phobe...eh leftists?

Con:

I was roundly criticized by this sites leftists for commenting that hetro, homosexuals, pedophiles, those who engage in sex with animals and objects all make choices as to what they have sex with. Now Barack Obama's department of Justice has made a direct comparision of gays with those who engage in incest...what say you leftists?

maybe i just missed it, but where DID they compare gay marriage to incest?

Originally Posted by nickcuse

maybe i just missed it, but where DID they compare gay marriage to incest?

Rachel Maddow was talking about this with Howard Dean last night, something about an uncle and a niece and states recognizing each other's marriage laws.

Here it is:

The Obama administration cited Catalano v. Catalano (marriage of uncle to niece, "though valid in Italy under its laws, was not valid in Connecticut because it contravened the public policy of th[at] state"); Wilkins v. Zelichowski (marriage of 16-year-old female held invalid in New Jersey, regardless of validity in Indiana where performed, in light of N.J. policy reflected in statute permitting adult female to secure annulment of her underage marriage), and re Mortenson's Estate, (marriage of first cousins held invalid in Arizona, though lawfully performed in New Mexico, given Arizona policy reflected in statute declaring such marriages "prohibited and void").

Obama Justice Department Defends Defense Of Marriage Act – That Candidate Obama Opposed - Political Punch

Originally Posted by Blueneck

Rachel Maddow was talking about this with Howard Dean last night, something about an uncle and a niece and states recognizing each other's marriage laws.

Here it is:



Obama Justice Department Defends Defense Of Marriage Act – That Candidate Obama Opposed - Political Punch

hmm, but is that really comparing gay marriage to incest? or is it showing how the laws that apply in one state can't be used in another state to get federal benefits, if the federal laws don't support it.

thats far different than what the right does in talking about gay marriage itself, not the laws governing it, claiming the slippery slope that would be people wanting to marry their sister or pet dog if gays can marry.

thats how it appears to me anyone. ones talking about laws, the other is talking about social trends.

The Obama administration cited Catalano v. Catalano (marriage of uncle to niece, "though valid in Italy under its laws, was not valid in Connecticut because it contravened the public policy of th[at] state&quot -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I just want to be clear here. This is the statement from the Department of Justice comparing gay marriage to incest? There's nothing more? This is the extent of it? Correct?

Originally Posted by conservative

Friday, June 12, 2009

Obama DOJ lies to Politico in defending hate brief against gays

by John Aravosis (DC) on 6/12/2009 01:26:00 PM
Ben Smith at Politico just reported the following statement from the Department of Justice over their brief, filed last night, comparing gay marriage to incest:

As it generally does with existing statutes, the Justice Department is defending the law on the books in court. The president has said he wants to see a legislative repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act because it prevents LGBT couples from being granted equal rights and benefits. However, until Congress passes legislation repealing the law, the administration will continue to defend the statute when it is challenged in the justice system.Yeah, you see, that's an outright lie. Fortunately for you, and unfortunately for Justice, Joe and I are both lawyers. We suspected this betrayal was coming, so we read up on the law. In fact, George W. Bush (ACLU et al., v. Norman Y. Mineta - "The U.S. Department of Justice has notified Congress that it will not defend a law prohibiting the display of marijuana policy reform ads in public transit systems."), Bill Clinton (Dickerson v. United States - "Because the Miranda decision is of constitutional dimension, Congress may not legislate a contrary rule unless this Court were to overrule Miranda.... Section 3501 cannot constitutionally authorize the admission of a statement that would be excluded under this Court's Miranda cases."), George HW Bush (Metro Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission), and Ronald Reagan (INS v./ Chadha - "Chadha then filed a petition for review of the deportation order in the Court of Appeals, and the INS joined him in arguing that § 244(c)(2) is unconstitutional.") all joined in lawsuits opposing federal laws that they didn't like, laws that they felt were unconstitutional. It is an outright lie to suggest that the DOJ had no choice.

But it's worse than that. Let's just assume for a moment that the Justice spokesman didn't lie to Politico, even though they did. Let's just assume that Obama had no choice but to oppose the gay couple filing this DOMA lawsuit. Where in the law does it say that Obama was required to compare gay marriage to incest?

AMERICAblog News| A great nation deserves the truth: Obama DOJ lies to Politico in defending hate brief against gays

I guess barack Obama is a homo-phobe...eh leftists?

Con:

I was roundly criticized by this sites leftists for commenting that hetro, homosexuals, pedophiles, those who engage in sex with animals and objects all make choices as to what they have sex with. Now Barack Obama's department of Justice has made a direct comparision of gays with those who engage in incest...what say you leftists?

Where in the hell are the gay activist ???? Shouldn't they be protesting or something ?

Originally Posted by Six

Where in the hell are the gay activist ???? Shouldn't they be protesting or something ?

maybe they realize it doesn't mean whats being claimed in the op? although they are still upset that obama isn't pushing this more. just not in the way the op wishes.