By Kristina Wong

Jun 15, 2009 2:53pm

Gay Rights Group Tells President Obama That His Pro-DOMA Legal Brief Caused LGBT Community Pain

The Obama Justice Department last week wrote a brief in support of the Defense of Marriage Act, which as a candidate then-Sen. Obama called “abhorrent.”

The brief, which compared in legal terms same-sex marriages to incestuous ones, has met with some anger in the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) community, among others.

Today Joe Solmonese, the president of the LGBT rights organization the Human Rights Campaign, wrote to the Presidentexpressing the feeling that “when your administration filed a brief defending the constitutionality of the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act, I realized that although I and other LGBT leaders have introduced ourselves to you as policy makers, we clearly have not been heard, and seen, as what we also are: human beings whose lives, loves, and families are equal to yours.  I know this because this brief would not have seen the light of day if someone in your administration who truly recognized our humanity and equality had weighed in with you.”

Solmonese took issue with the Obama Justice Department’s use of “the well-worn argument that excluding same-sex couples from basic protections is somehow good for other married people.” (The brief said that “Because all 50 States recognize hetero-sexual marriage, it was reasonable and rational for Congress to maintain its longstanding policy of fostering this traditional and universally-recognized form of marriage.”)

Solmonese goes on to take issue with a number of arguments in the brief, concluding by writing, “I cannot overstate the pain that we feel as human beings and as families when we read an argument, presented in federal court, implying that our own marriages have no more constitutional standing than incestuous ones.”

He says to the president that the “brief should not be good enough for you.  The question is, Mr. President—do you believe that it’s good enough for us?”

-jpt

User Comments

I know the Obama admin has stated they are reviewing the policy with the Pentagon but its good for the LGBT community to keep up the pressure.

Posted by: Ryan C | June 15, 2009, 2:55 pm 2:55 pm

All of Obama’s promises come with an expiration date!

Posted by: carl | June 15, 2009, 3:29 pm 3:29 pm

All of Obama’s promises come with an expiration date!

Posted by: carl | June 15, 2009, 3:29 pm 3:29 pm

In the age of social media, JSol’s letter was a typical embarassment for Queer communities — please, let’s stop acting like LGBTQ are a cohesive group who get many of each other’s issues! For three days, Twitter and Facebook and blogs have seethed over the DOMA brief; and only now the fattest DC organization supposedly representing us responds? And with a rhetorical mealy-mouthedness totally out of touch with the level of anger and the urgency of matters?
Newsflash, JSol: homophobia enshrined in law kills many times an hour! We’re well past the time for pleading.

Posted by: @bigolpoofter | June 15, 2009, 3:29 pm 3:29 pm

In the age of social media, JSol’s letter was a typical embarassment for Queer communities — please, let’s stop acting like LGBTQ are a cohesive group who get many of each other’s issues! For three days, Twitter and Facebook and blogs have seethed over the DOMA brief; and only now the fattest DC organization supposedly representing us responds? And with a rhetorical mealy-mouthedness totally out of touch with the level of anger and the urgency of matters?
Newsflash, JSol: homophobia enshrined in law kills many times an hour! We’re well past the time for pleading.

Posted by: @bigolpoofter | June 15, 2009, 3:29 pm 3:29 pm

I can understand having to, even choosing to, defend DOMA as a federal law that is on the books. But the language, the word choices, of the comparisons was just so unnecessary. The same arguments could have been made just as well without those, and that is what is so bothersome because it makes it seem like he is as chin-deep in the same prejudices as the people who actually did the writing of it. His name is ultimately on it, and at best no-one is paying attention to what his administration is saying about us and what gets said by our leaders does matter.

Posted by: Marty | June 15, 2009, 3:36 pm 3:36 pm

I can understand having to, even choosing to, defend DOMA as a federal law that is on the books. But the language, the word choices, of the comparisons was just so unnecessary. The same arguments could have been made just as well without those, and that is what is so bothersome because it makes it seem like he is as chin-deep in the same prejudices as the people who actually did the writing of it. His name is ultimately on it, and at best no-one is paying attention to what his administration is saying about us and what gets said by our leaders does matter.

Posted by: Marty | June 15, 2009, 3:36 pm 3:36 pm

I can understand having to, even choosing to, defend DOMA as a federal law that is on the books. But the language, the word choices, of the comparisons was just so unnecessary. The same arguments could have been made just as well without those, and that is what is so bothersome because it makes it seem like he is as chin-deep in the same prejudices as the people who actually did the writing of it. His name is ultimately on it, and at best no-one is paying attention to what his administration is saying about us and what gets said by our leaders does matter.

Posted by: Marty | June 15, 2009, 3:37 pm 3:37 pm

What is the gay community going to do? They can’t vote Republican.

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | June 15, 2009, 4:10 pm 4:10 pm

I have to stand for the traditional marriage view. Has the LGBT community considered about the right of the people hold traditional marriage view for a few thousand years???? They don’t. The LGBT community needs to find a name other than marriage to define their one-on-one partnership. Please don’t try to ‘STEAL’ ‘marriage’ from us that it has been used for thousands years by the heterosexual society to educate theri children for the covenant relationship between a man and a woman. Who is intruding who’s right?????

Posted by: Hui | June 15, 2009, 4:26 pm 4:26 pm

Obama fooled me once, but he won’t fool me a second time. If the Dems aren’t going to advance our civil rights, then we might as well vote for our pocketbooks and go with the Republicans. The Democrats will be in big trouble if they lose the funding and support of the GLBT community that they have taken for granted for so long.

Posted by: Dixiesland | June 15, 2009, 4:50 pm 4:50 pm

“then we might as well vote for our pocketbooks and go with the Republicans. The Democrats will be in big trouble if they lose the funding and support of the GLBT community that they have taken for granted for so long.”
While the Democrats stand to lose the support of the LGBT community there is no way the Republicans then gain that support as the Republican party platform is openly hostile to the LGBT community.
More likely that support shifts to the Green Party.

Posted by: Ryan C | June 15, 2009, 4:59 pm 4:59 pm

While the Democrats stand to lose the support of the LGBT community there is no way the Republicans then gain that support as the Republican party platform is openly hostile to the LGBT community.
More likely that support shifts to the Green Party.
-Posted by: Ryan C
My partner is planning to go for the Greens in the future, but I’m leaning towards the GOP. The Dems are no different than the GOP, with the only exception being the lip-service they provide. Either direction we choose, we should all leave the Dems in mass exodus.

Posted by: Dixiesland | June 15, 2009, 5:05 pm 5:05 pm

“The Dems are no different than the GOP”
While the Democrats can hardly crow about their stands for LGBT rights, the GOP actively works against those rights from protection against discrimination to marriage to adoption.

Posted by: Ryan C | June 15, 2009, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm

Obama is the same liar as Bush! Period!
On all issues! Wake up!!!!!!!

Posted by: NYC-Independent1664 | June 15, 2009, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm

Obama is a liar, just like Bush! Wake up!

Posted by: NYC-Independent1664 | June 15, 2009, 6:16 pm 6:16 pm

Considering marriage equality is still a state issue, Obama should stay out of the conversation. However, eventually Obama will have to face the issue and will probably sway to the side that provides him the most political support. If he sways away from the activist gay community, he will probably lose the next election. When gays decide not to vote, then the radical right will win.

Posted by: KsDevil | June 15, 2009, 6:16 pm 6:16 pm

I am tired off yall complaining, Obama
won’t do this or that. Every time I turn the tv or read the paper Obama have
not done anything for gay rights yet is tthat the only reason you voted for him. I need a job and insurance and that
needs to be his main focus right now.
The president also need to focus on our
safety. I wish you would give him time
he will get don’t ask don’t tell, he
has only been in office 5 months.

Posted by: Jacquelyn | June 15, 2009, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm

“The Dems are no different than the GOP”
Many environmentalists said that when they voted for Ralph Nader in 2000. Boy did they learn their lesson!

Posted by: Skip | June 15, 2009, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm

One thing that is not understood –there are many thousands of voters who consider the right for gays to marry as one of the most important changes needed in this country, and we are not gay. For any polititian who thinks it is only the gays that are dissapointed in Obama’s stance is a fool. After what the republicans did to our economy, education, and health care during the Bush years, it would take alot for me to vote republican, but I will vote for any party that views all citizens as having equal rights.

Posted by: vissionquest | June 15, 2009, 6:55 pm 6:55 pm

“Considering marriage equality is still a state issue, Obama should stay out of the conversation.”
As long as DOMA exists, its also a Fed issue.

Posted by: Ryan C | June 15, 2009, 7:14 pm 7:14 pm

The Obama administration is behind the curve by about 100 miles on GLYB issues. Over 70% of Americans (including 56% of conservatives) favor ending the ban on gay soldiers in the military. That’s overdue.
As many straight people as gay ones are discouraged by his failure to show leadership in these transformative days for GLTB rights. Either we all have rights or none of us have.
It’s past time for him to step up.

Posted by: ryan | June 15, 2009, 8:50 pm 8:50 pm

It is pure political calculation… Obama is weaning the Social Conservatives from the GOP, because So-Cons have ALWAYS been fair-weather friends. The LGBT community is expendable, because the Dems cannot imagine gay GOPers… if he needs us, he will just sweet talk and prance around his liberal shills who will make promises on HIS behalf. He’s a Chicago pol through and through so don’t you ever forget it.
If you want to move him, you better have a political canon – make him accountable, withhold support on one of his other pet projects!

Posted by: RB in DB | June 15, 2009, 10:01 pm 10:01 pm

please. least important issue of the day..week…year or millenium.

Posted by: once u get it you'll want out | June 15, 2009, 10:18 pm 10:18 pm

The Preamble to the United States Constitution is a brief introductory statement of the fundamental purposes and guiding principles which the Constitution is meant to serve:
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
The term “Posterity” as used in the Preamble means (1) Future generations,(2) All of a person’s descendants, or (3) A group consisting of those descended directly from the same parents (parents of the opposite sex of course).
Can two gay men or two lebian women ensure Posterity mentioned in the Preamble? Answer is resounding ‘no’, for they (married or not) cannot produce children as descendants.
In essence, the effect from the behavior of being gay men or lebian women is a contrbuting factor to a dying people.
Needless to say, President Obama, DOJ, and Congress have the mandatory duty to protect “LIFE” under the United States Constitution.
As the Supreme Court stated in Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 12 (1967): “Marriage is one of the basic civil rights of man, fundamental to our very existence and survival.”

Posted by: TheTruth | June 15, 2009, 10:18 pm 10:18 pm

“Can two gay men or two lebian women ensure Posterity mentioned in the Preamble? Answer is resounding ‘no’, for they (married or not) cannot produce children as descendants.”
Spare us your medieval philosophical theories. Next are you going to try and discriminate against heterosexual couples who can’t have kids and adopt instead?

Posted by: Skip | June 15, 2009, 10:34 pm 10:34 pm

LOL I don’t think Obama knows what he’s doing, he’s overwhelmed. But I think he’ll come through-sort of- we’ll see what he does. I wouldn’t give up on him just yet.

Posted by: Elmo | June 15, 2009, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm

I don’t understand how “traditional” marriage is threatened here. There is no law that would impair the ability of a man and a woman to marry. If somehow the thought that of a gay marriage is enough to destroy a “traditional” marriage, then maybe that marriage should never have happened.
But I don’t care any more. This is not a free country. The equal protection clause doesn’t apply to me. The full faith and credit clause does not apply to me. Our “freedom of religion” doesn’t apply to me, because gay marriage would be an illegal religious ceremony in my state. Apparently I suffer all the penalties of the law but receive none of its benefits.
Something snapped in me. I don’t care about these issues any more. I don’t care about America any more. I would rather just leave.

Posted by: Ken | June 15, 2009, 11:32 pm 11:32 pm

Can someone please explain; in a rational manner; how marriage is a civil right?
The issues of civil rights are employment, eduction, housing, and legal.
Marriage is still a choice.It’s a personal decision,like what car to buy.
No one is forced to get married.
You gotta admit, to call marriage a civil right is a big stretch.

Posted by: MisElaineous | June 15, 2009, 11:46 pm 11:46 pm

Excuse me. Gay here, and I do vote republican. And I’m not the only one.
I wouldn’t count on Obama for anything good.

Posted by: Libby | June 16, 2009, 12:12 am 12:12 am

The term “Posterity” as used in the Preamble means
Posted by: TheTruth
I don’t see where the preamble mandates posterity.
re: ‘or they (married or not) cannot produce children as descendants.
you may have missed this but, not all heterosexual ( that means men and women )
can have children/posterity
just another example of the incredible stupidity presented by the ‘right’.

Posted by: Terse | June 16, 2009, 12:21 am 12:21 am

I did vote for Obama and he is in the wrong here.
He needs to get rid of DOMA & DADT. I believe he will get around to this I just don’t know when, it’s a basic issue of equal rights.

Posted by: Terse | June 16, 2009, 12:24 am 12:24 am

When Bill Clinton signed DOMA that was the last straw for me. I voted Green in the next two elections and after years of donating my time and money to the Democrats I kind of left politics behind. Then Obama came along and brought me back in. I donated time and money and actually started to think things might be different. Then this. Im just one person but there are alot of folks like me. If the Dems dont actually keep their promises for a change there are alot of grassroots folks that are going to sit the next round out. Dont underestimate the impact of losing motivated grassroots support.

Posted by: Rick W | June 16, 2009, 12:28 am 12:28 am

” I wish you would give him time.”
Obama has time enough to attack the gay community but not time enough to honor his promises?
Folks like this remind me of an abused dog who waits in doorway, tail wagging, even when there’s no hope of affection from an abusive owner.
New rule: no spine, no vote, no money. Would must rather have an honest but hostile Republican in power.

Posted by: James | June 16, 2009, 1:25 am 1:25 am

Libby: you have answer you own question…..and if you still don’t see it…having a job is a choice, having a house is a choice, getting an education is a choice….
Marriage is a choice, but a choice that we can have by law!

Posted by: Art | June 16, 2009, 1:30 am 1:30 am

OBAMAS BETRAYAL OF TRUST***Yes We Can if you are STR8… No you can’t if you are GAY! It is so sad that he just decided to tell us to sit at the back of the bus. The fact of an electorate to have trust in him to bring integrity to the White House is going down the drain with this one. I had worked tirelessly on his campaign even though I heard that a closeted friend of his said he did not support the gays. I am so sad that his true colors are coming out, literally and they are not pink or purple, Barack has found himself colorblind to our lives, our existence and our meaning of life. Are we not allowed life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. When one qualifies another’s happiness as not worthy, there is something wrong! The cancer of hate is eating away at the hope that began this presidency… I wonder if this slide will continue or if he will see the light of day and realize this wrong for what it is, a dark hateful piece of legislation. To let this legislation continue is a crime against our common humanity. Each one of us dies a little more… because of it, str8, gay, human being…

Posted by: Dr. Lee | June 16, 2009, 1:48 am 1:48 am

i voted for the green party because they support gay marriage. and i tend to favor this party over all others. i don’t agree with their stance on a few issues, but most people will not agree 100% with a political party.
the gay community that voted for barack snobama or john mcslain are self-hating. those of you that voted for either of these candidates, you created this mess.
if gay rights are wanted, you have to vote third party. period.

Posted by: jesse | June 16, 2009, 2:28 am 2:28 am

Not that presidents breaking their promises is anything new, but it’s hard not to feel betrayed here. It’s nice to know Obama’s promises only count when they are convenient.

Posted by: Lil | June 16, 2009, 3:38 am 3:38 am

During the campaign both Obama and McCain had the same stance in terms of gay marriage. They did not support it. Now, suddenly the GLBT community is upset. What did they expect? I do not vote single issue. But as a gay man, I never was satisfied with Obama’s rhetoric in terms of equal rights for all citizens. He has used this issue as a carrot to dangle in front of the GLBT community to get their vote and their unending support. It obviously worked.
Even this past weekend and from the comments on this board, I notice that many in the community still believe in him and say it will happen, “they just don’t know when.” My take is that it will not happen. Much as with the 2004 elections where many states had marriage admendments on their ballots and the Bush campaign played to those fears. It was about winning an election. Never about a stand or belief.
It seems Bush’s rhetoric against GLBT issues is as false as Obama’s is in support. They are both politicians playing a game with people’s lives, feelings, and attitudes. Obama is showing has been showing little by little his true feelings with respect to GLBT issues.
If U.S. citizens truly want action and believes it will happen, they need to quit blindly supporting the current president and hold him to task for his promises. Make him accountable. It begins with money and votes. Respectfully show him that our voices are to be heard or our pocketbooks will close and our votes will go to other candidates. Most importantly, teach Obama and all politicians a lesson. Do not merely say these things but actually do them.

Posted by: tired_dem | June 16, 2009, 7:49 am 7:49 am

The gay community might have just as well put their support behind the former Miss California.

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | June 16, 2009, 9:21 am 9:21 am

DOMA ask, DOMA tell.

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | June 16, 2009, 9:31 am 9:31 am

I’m surprised that gays are surprised at the Obama Administration’s stance. He told you during the campaign that he didn’t support gay marriage. I guess gays and lesbians wanted to believe that it was something he was saying that was going to change magically once he was in office. Considering the homophobia in the black subculture and considering Reverand Wright’s stance and his church’s stance on gays, this was entirely predictable. Of course, during the primaries, you could have voted for Clinton who actually voted AGAINST DOMA. Oh well…..

Posted by: EML | June 16, 2009, 9:43 am 9:43 am

Who cares?

Posted by: Greg | June 16, 2009, 11:41 am 11:41 am

MisElanious — marriage is a civil right in this country because our laws are written in such a way that other rights depend on it. See: social security, tax law, and especially immigration. (We are losing smart people because they cannot live here with their foreign-born partners — I know several who have reluctantly left the US for their partners’ more welcoming countries of birth. These are people our country paid to educate, etc., and we are shooting ourselves in the foot by essentially making them leave.)
I can get “married” now — plenty of churches are happy to have me. What I can’t get is the legal benefits of marriage. It’s ironic that our supposedly secular government is more hung up on a few lines of the Bible than the church I was raised in is.

Posted by: The Greatest of These Is Love | June 16, 2009, 12:14 pm 12:14 pm

the Obama administration says wait, wait, its not the right time, there r so many other pressing, truly dangerous concerns….HE will be voted out of office in ’12 and some #### republican will legalize same sex marriage!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Posted by: robert | June 16, 2009, 7:47 pm 7:47 pm

It’s too bad, but I still have high hopes for future changes. Politics is so frustrating sometimes.

Posted by: Claude | June 21, 2009, 4:42 pm 4:42 pm

HA HA HA!!! GAY AND VOTING REPUBLICAN?! That’s like roaches for raid ha ha ha

Posted by: GIRL NEXT DOOR | July 9, 2010, 6:23 pm 6:23 pm

Tired Dem: I think your analysis of the politicians positions on this issue is very accurate. I am on the other side of the debate but I too think the politicians use the issue as a game to generate support and votes among their constituents.

Posted by: Tom | July 13, 2010, 3:06 pm 3:06 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.