Obama: could not avoid weighing in on gay marriage court case

By Jeff Mason | Reuters – 5 hrs ago


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama said on Friday he felt compelled to weigh in on a California same-sex marriage case before the Supreme Court because of his and society's "profoundly positive" evolution on gay rights.

Obama's administration on Thursday filed a brief urging the court to allow same-sex marriages to resume in California, which banned them in a 2008 voter-approved measure known as Proposition 8.

Obama did not have to submit an opinion on the case and the court's nine justices are under no obligation to give it weight. But the president said he wanted his position to be known.

"Last year upon a long period of reflection, I concluded that we cannot discriminate against same-sex couples when it comes to marriage," Obama told reporters, referring to his announcement during the 2012 election campaign.

"I think that the same evolution that I've gone through is an evolution that the country as a whole has gone through. And I think it is a profoundly positive thing," he said.

Obama has made gay rights a priority during his time in office, helping end the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy that prevented gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military.

His position on marriage took his support for gay rights to a new level, however, and activists were encouraged when he noted the issue prominently in his second Inaugural Address, hoping that was a sign of more action to come.

The Obama administration is involved in another gay rights case before the court, challenging the constitutionality of a central part of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage under federal law as being between a man and a woman.

Obama said he thought his administration could not avoid weighing in on the California case as well. He said the measure did not provide any rationale for discriminating against same-sex couples.

"I felt it was important for us to articulate what I believe and what this administration stands for," he said.

"If the Supreme Court asks me or my attorney general or solicitor general, do we think that meets constitutional muster, I felt it was important for us to answer that question honestly. And the answer is no."

(Editing by Xavier Briand)

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-could-not-avoid-weighing-gay-marriage-c...

Views: 15

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

He's trying to sway the Supreme Courts ruling just like he did with Obamacare. This is NOT okay.

Obama said..."I felt it was important for us to articulate what I believe..."

Doesn't he always?

Good Post.  But the Christians lost the Gay Marriage battle the day they let politicians in control of marriage.  If marriage is sacred, then politicians should only be able to do civil unions.  Putting politicians in charge of something sacred was the error.

But once in political hands, the outcome of gay marriage is inevitable.  Politicians even if graded fairly are never graded on Christian beliefs.  Instead, even I would only grade them on keeping with the constitution and our motto of "E PLuribus Unun" - which means from many we become one.  A strict definition of E Pluribus Unum and the Statue of Liberty and what the US is supposed to be, says that all should have freedoms - and that will include gays.  So my Christian side is shocked.  But my government side says - politicians really have no choice.  Like many things, including education and how many ounces of liquid to drink, politicians should never have been given the power in the first place.  But someone gave them that power.  Too late now.  We can get the bums out, but some things like Marriage now being up to politicians, is likely too far gone.

For me, marriage has always been a religious concept.  I agree with you 100% that a non-religious state such as the United States or any of the states of its republic has no legitimacy in the "marriage" business since marriage is a religious concept.  Civil unions; go for it. There is a legitimate interest by the state in ensuring that the progeny of civil unions are viable and healthy.  We have tried to avoid problems for the state by requiring (in some places) blood tests for STDs which if present are known to create problems in offspring.  Civil union, sure.  Give to Caesar that which is Caesar's. But, marriage is a far deeper concept than Caesar could ever understand.  It doesn't belong in the hands of the state.

RSS

Attention:

 

 

Please view our mission, policy, and legal disclaimer to learn about us by visiting the main menu.  Thank you.

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION!

BRING BACK #HUAC

http://bit.ly/2mqIVmH 

CONTACT CONGRESS!

Let your voice be counted!

House:  http://1.usa.gov/mHZjgo

Senate:  http://1.usa.gov/3UAs

 

 

PLEASE PRAY FOR OUR NATION.

 

 

national debt

Founders' Corner

Latest Activity

kwicgov55 replied to Watchman's discussion Where is everyone?
"Thanks for the information Duke. Your post is the first notification that I have received from FR…"
Jun 14
Duke posted a status
"Look at "Nuremberg 2.0 friends, on you tube."
Jun 13
Duke replied to Watchman's discussion Where is everyone?
"The big "SCAM", it's all been a lie.  Please check out "Nuremberg…"
Jun 13
kwicgov55 replied to Watchman's discussion Where is everyone?
"I believe you are right Watchman. I also think that the presidential election isn't the only…"
Jun 7
kwicgov55 replied to Watchman's discussion Where is everyone?
"I've wondered the same thing Watchman. I haven't had any notifications from FR in months.…"
Jun 7
Jodi180 replied to Watchman's discussion Where is everyone?
"Wow...that sounds like a horrible winter!  Good to hear your getting mobile and feeling…"
Jun 2
Ruthann replied to Watchman's discussion Where is everyone?
"Hi Jodi, I was sick most of the winter passing out & dizzy. Nothing worst then regaining…"
Jun 1
Jodi180 replied to Watchman's discussion Where is everyone?
"Hi Ruthann...good to see you back here.  Yep, think it's high time to regroup!"
Jun 1
Ruthann posted discussions
May 27
Ruthann replied to Watchman's discussion Where is everyone?
"I check in from time to time but there never seems to be anyone here.  HELLO! IS ANYONE STILL…"
May 26
Jodi180 replied to Watchman's discussion Where is everyone?
"I agree.  We need a movement like 2009. According to the talking heads, cRATS can expect a…"
May 8
Watchman replied to Watchman's discussion Where is everyone?
"I think we have a good idea how it happened, and it was executed brilliantly. They used Covid as…"
May 7
kwicgov55 liked Jodi180's discussion "Why Vaccine Passports Equal Slavery Forever"
May 5
Jodi180 posted a discussion

"Why Vaccine Passports Equal Slavery Forever"

Um...anyone else unnerved by this vid?According to Dr. Wolf...this will probably get me on a list.See More
May 3
Jodi180 replied to Watchman's discussion Where is everyone?
"Still trying to understand how this happened? I think we're shell-shocked, Watchman."
May 3
Watchman posted a discussion

Where is everyone?

It's been really quiet since the phony inauguration on Jan 20th. Where is everyone?See More
May 2

© 2021   Fundamental Refounding.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service