Judge Rules Defense of Marriage Act Is Unconstitutional; Will President Obama’s Justice Department Appeal?

What Obama says and what he actually does are two very different things.
He does it because he keeps getting away with it.

Marriage is a voluntary contract between two people. What does the government have to do with that?
Oh right, Government doesn’t abide by their own contracts anymore… Now this is beginning to make sense.

I find it hard to believe in the year 2010 that this is still an issue.

THis is getting ridiculous!!! Every time this administration disagrees with something they try to call it unconstitutional. Very convenient to hide be hind the Constitution when it benefits your agenda.

As with many other hot button issues, POTUS has managed to either avoid or bungle his stance.

What are the judges gonna try next? Say that the 31 states that have voted to keep marriage between one man and one woman are unconstitutional? Talk about out of touch with the will of the people. Even in CA, the biggest liberal state in the nation, a 2000 ballot measure establishing a California state law against same-sex marriage passed with 61 percent of the vote.

I think the most revealing example of the real attitude was the SNL version of Joe Biden’s ‘hospital visiting’ skit.

I doubt it. It is a very complex thing for Obama because he has unresolved personal issues and complex political considerations. Leaving aside his religion or personal beliefs Obama is in a pickle. He wants to keep gays as a core fundraising group, yet also has seeming dedicated his administration to Islamic pursuits (even extending to NASA.) These are at odds. He also wants to continue the aggrandisement and supremacy of the Federal govt and yet this court decision is a “states rights” decision- a direct contradiction to Obama’s beliefs in a “top down”, “command and control” political-economic system. Lastly, all these things must be evaluated in how they impact the Comintern goals. He has hard decisions to make.

CND FOX —- You can’t bring yourself to admit 2009 was a financial disaster because it might just taint our President? He has added to the financial disaster by throwing $2 trillion out the window with insurance regulation and Wall street gifts. That is a financial disaster. Now, the GOP wants to use unspent stimulus on unemployment extensions and the Dems try to play it as the GOP blocking extensions. You could never bring yourself to admit this President has made mistakes.

@dk: Well, it’s 2010 and it’s still an issue /in the US!/
As with other things to do with gays and lesbians, Canada and the EU have their act together… leaving the US to enjoy some extra decades of soul-killing law farce.

what about gays in the military who want to marry? what if they’re gay new black panthers? how about a “don’t ask don’t tell i’m a married gay new black panther” policy?

CND FOX….do you have pom poms? the middle class knows than FANNIE MAE and FREDDIE mac and frank and dood have as much to do with this economic downturn as anyone. people also have figured out the BIG O is full of it and with all his education to think that the plight of many cannot be cured by taking from others.2 years unemployment while illegals fill jobs? that must be what they teach at harvard these days. you have unerestimated what it is to be an american….self reliance is in our blood.

Obama is required to defend DOMA as a law of the land, kind of like he does for immigration but different. :)
I do not undertand how “Marriage” is between a Man and a Woman yet Garriage is between to gays. Using that analogy why would it not be Warriage or MWarrige?

CBA the fact the government dicriminates in such areas as health care and social security for married homosexuals is the issue in this case. It has nothing to do with observing the validity of the contract

The Judge is wrong and falsely interpets the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Congress in 2006 (under President Clinton)had the right to create the Defense of Marriage Act.

Recognizing gay marriage would impact the death tax collections.. negatively..

Perfect! The Obama administration will sue Arizona because their law conflicts with Federal prerogatives, but will not defend the Federal DOMA because it interferes with State prerogatives…

Have we forgotten? This is, unfortunately, not about states’ rights– the people of Massachusetts did not vote for gay marriage; the court imposed it, overturning their will. Now we are talking about it as if the PEOPLE of Massachusetts wanted same-sex marriage legalized and that the federal gov’t is going against their will. This is how twisted this has become to convince the public to defend this as States’ rights.

DOMA is unconstitutional. It validates segregation between social groups in the United States. It specifically prevents individuals from having the freedom to marry the person (or people) they wish to marry, with the exception of one man and one woman – which is a BIBLICAL restriction. This illustrates the Christian fundamentalist morality that underpins our government. What about religions that allow plural marriage? Restricting marriage to one man, one woman, also affects these groups. Again, making the point that DOMA, with it’s obvious foundation on the Church, violates the separation of Church and State that is specifically mandated by the Constitution. Moreover, it is a Civil Rights violation. It denies citizens equal protection under the law. It violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the Civil Rights act of 1964 by withholding funds from all citizens who would otherwise be eligible for federally assisted programs under the aegis of defining marriage by limited parameters, and denying anyone who wishes to be married outside these parameters access to these funds and programs.
The States do have authority under the constitution to regulate themselves as their citizens see fit, with respect to marriage and the family. So not only does DOMA violate Civil Rights, which are protected almost fanatically today in most other areas, it violates the rights of the states to regulate themselves. Every state recognizes marriages of American citizens that happen in other States, or even overseas, so long as they are between one man and one woman. If the Federal Government should have any stance at all, they should be pushing to not only have DOMA repealed, but to instate a policy requiring every state to recognize all marriages equally. If a state doesn’t recognize Gay marriages performed in another State or outside the country, then they should not recognize any marriage that takes place outside their borders at all.
THAT is the only constitutional Stance that the Federal Government can legitimately take. Mandate that the states recognize all marriages equally – acknowledge them all, or none.