Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional

Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tazzygirl -> Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 9:42:56 AM)
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. appeals court in Boston became the first such court to strike down as unconstitutional the federal Defense of Marriage Act, ruling Thursday that it unfairly denies equal benefits to legally married same-sex couples. The ruling is a victory for gay-rights advocates and the Obama administration, which had refused to defend that part of the 1996 law. The decision sets the stage for a ruling next year by the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of the law that limits federal recognition of marriage to the union of a man and a woman. The Boston-based judges stressed their decision did not establish a national right to gay marriage. That issue remains a matter for the states, they said. But in states such as Massachusetts, where gays and lesbians can legally marry, the federal government cannot deny these couples the right to file a joint federal tax return or to receive a survivor's benefit under the Social Security Act, the appeals court said. The court's opinion said there are more than 100,000 legally married gay and lesbian couples in the half-dozen states that have legalized same-sex marriages. Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996 to prevent same-sex marriages in one state from being legally recognized by all states. Usually, a couple's marriage in one state is recognized as valid in all states. However, the federal law said no state "shall be required to give effect" to a "relationship between persons of the same sex." Moreover, it said that under federal law, a marriage "means only the legal union between one man and one woman." The case decided Thursday dealt only with this latter provision involving federal law and benefits. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-doma-appeals-court-20120531,0,4385237.story?track=rss

mnottertail -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 9:50:46 AM)
Which really kills me. If the feds wouldn't have voted this DOMA, the issue would remain a states rights issue forever, but ...this will go fed at some point as among the several states.

tazzygirl -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 9:53:15 AM)
Unless I am mistaken, isnt that what happened with the Jim Crow laws?

mnottertail -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 10:00:11 AM)
In our lifetimes; due entirely to the ineptness of republican ideological bumptuous and cravenly defense of some thitherto fantasy 'american way of life', and the unintended consequences thereof, they have guarenteed that there will be gay black couples peacefully and commonly seated at the soda fountain in Bumfuck, MS. I love those fuckin' guys...........

SternSkipper -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 10:19:26 AM)
quote: WASHINGTON -- The U.S. appeals court in Boston became the first such court to strike down as unconstitutional the federal Defense of Marriage Act, ruling Thursday that it unfairly denies equal benefits to legally married same-sex couples. + Thank god the authors are headquartered in an abandoned daycare center in Westboro and the DRAWING BOARD is sponge erasable. "Time to call Crayola again"

papassion -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 11:28:35 AM)
With Liberals pushing for unlimited immigration, we will eventually end up with a government with Sharia law. They will settle the gay marriage issue once and for all.

DarkSteven -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 11:34:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: papassion With Liberals pushing for unlimited immigration, we will eventually end up with a government with Sharia law. They will settle the gay marriage issue once and for all. What the hell? 1. Nobody's pushing for unlimited immigration. 2. Every single judge in the US is pledged to follow the US Constitution and US laws. Period. End of story. Some whacko conservatives have created an issue with the hypothetical "What if judges decided to forsake their oath of office and follow Sharia law?" It ain't gonna happen. 3. The above ruling regarding the DOMA involved real judges evaluating real laws using the real US Constitution. Much stronger than ain't-gonna-happen hypotheticals. 4. You seem to have some idea that new judges will overturn the entire body of existing US law in order to impose Sharia law. Please study civics and how laws come into being, and how they are required to fit into existing law.

Lucylastic -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 11:39:14 AM)
THats not the first time Ive heard that argument today Steven. Seems to be a lot of baseless fear..or plain stupidity, IM not making that call tho

tazzygirl -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 11:42:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: papassion With Liberals pushing for unlimited immigration, we will eventually end up with a government with Sharia law. They will settle the gay marriage issue once and for all. Liberals? Thursday's opinion in Massachusetts vs. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services was written by Judge Michael Boudin, an appointee of President George H.W. Bush. It was joined by Chief Judge Sandra Lynch, a Clinton appointee, and Judge Juan Torruella, a Reagan appointee. In the key passage, the judges stressed they were upholding a state's right to insist on equal treatment for its married couples. "To conclude, many Americans believe that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, and most Americans live in states where that is the law today. One virtue of federalism is that it permits this diversity of governance based on local choice, but this applies as well to the states that have chosen to legalize same-sex marriage," Boudin wrote. "Under current Supreme Court authority, Congress' denial of federal benefits to same-sex couples lawfully married in Massachusetts has not been adequately supported by any permissible federal interest."

Musicmystery -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 11:58:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: papassion With Liberals pushing for unlimited immigration, we will eventually end up with a government with Sharia law. They will settle the gay marriage issue once and for all. Yeah. That's it. How did you figure that out? We want no immigration law at all. Everyone welcome! And since the vast majority of the world is Muslim, more than 85% I heard, they'll clearly get elected, change the Constitution, and bring in Sharia law. I applaud your clever insight. What the fuck is wrong with you?

Musicmystery -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 11:59:29 AM)
quote: THats not the first time Ive heard that argument today Steven. Must be on the talk shows. Mindless Parrots. When will they realize they're being played?

joether -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 4:07:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven quote: ORIGINAL: papassion With Liberals pushing for unlimited immigration, we will eventually end up with a government with Sharia law. They will settle the gay marriage issue once and for all. What the hell? 1. Nobody's pushing for unlimited immigration. 2. Every single judge in the US is pledged to follow the US Constitution and US laws. Period. End of story. Some whacko conservatives have created an issue with the hypothetical "What if judges decided to forsake their oath of office and follow Sharia law?" It ain't gonna happen. 3. The above ruling regarding the DOMA involved real judges evaluating real laws using the real US Constitution. Much stronger than ain't-gonna-happen hypotheticals. 4. You seem to have some idea that new judges will overturn the entire body of existing US law in order to impose Sharia law. Please study civics and how laws come into being, and how they are required to fit into existing law. Before you get your panties in a knot, realize that he is simply spewing out what FOX News and conservative talk radio hosts have brainwashed him to speak on. Notice if you will the difference between what you and him wrote? He wrote a handful of sound bites that were linked together with scotch tape, and placed some fearmongering in there for good measure. Are you expecting his 'addition to the discussion' to be deep or thought provoking? Now look at what you wrote; which is based on reasonable assumptions about the nature of the goverment, its role, limits and abilities. FOX News and conservative radio hosts would NEVER say this stuff, as it might allow conservatives to think for themselves. If they started doing that, they would no longer past the litmus test for being 'conservative'.... I dont know any liberals myself who are infavor of unlimited immigration policies. Nor of being in favor of Sharia Law. Maybe those tinfoil hats REALLY do something to the conservative mind.... I'll take out a $15 million goverment study to test and verify this information. You want to co-author the document, DS? I'll split the $15 million down the middle for you! [:D]

Hillwilliam -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 4:46:13 PM)
Marriage is a Civil contract, PERIOD. As long as the people involved are of legal age, sane and not under coercion, it is LEGAL. The feds have no fucking business sticking their nose into a civil contract. As a silly aside, if you want to solve the economic slump we're in, I have 3 words. GAY BRIDAL REGISTRY. Buy your Bed, bath and beyond, Pier 1 and Crate and barrel stock before everyone else catches on. [8D]

Hillwilliam -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 4:47:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: papassion With Liberals pushing for unlimited immigration, we will eventually end up with a government with Sharia law. They will settle the gay marriage issue once and for all. That is quite possibly the most ignorance crammed into a small post I have ever seen in P&R. Are you so fucking stupid that you don't realize that Sharia Law would eliminate Gay marriage?

BitaTruble -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 5:16:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Buy your Bed, bath and beyond, Pier 1 and Crate and barrel stock before everyone else catches on. [8D] Oh, honey.. you are so not gay! Bed, Bath and Beyond? Really? No, just no. Think Williams-Sonoma & Kohler. [8D] Pier1.. hehehe ... you're so cute. [;)]

DarkSteven -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 5:16:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Marriage is a Civil contract, PERIOD. As long as the people involved are of legal age, sane and not under coercion, it is LEGAL. The feds have no fucking business sticking their nose into a civil contract. As a silly aside, if you want to solve the economic slump we're in, I have 3 words. GAY BRIDAL REGISTRY. Buy your Bed, bath and beyond, Pier 1 and Crate and barrel stock before everyone else catches on. [8D] That's essentially what the court said. They viewed marriage as a legal contract, and stated that DOMA prohibits gays from entering into said contract. All the complaints that gays had made - not being allowed on a partner's health care, not being permitted to see them in hospital as a relative, etc. - those were the specific reasons relied upon. Had marriage simply been a religious thing, or a paper formality, the government would have no standing. As it is, the court viewed prohibition of the marriage contract to be a serious detriment to gays.

kalikshama -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 6:51:17 PM)
quote: WASHINGTON -- The U.S. appeals court in Boston became the first such court to strike down as unconstitutional the federal Defense of Marriage Act, ruling Thursday that it unfairly denies equal benefits to legally married same-sex couples. The ruling is a victory for gay-rights advocates and the Obama administration, which had refused to defend that part of the 1996 law. [sm=cheering.gif][sm=cute.gif][sm=cheering.gif] quote: The decision sets the stage for a ruling next year by the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of the law that limits federal recognition of marriage to the union of a man and a woman. So what is the Supreme Court going to do?

SadistDave -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 7:06:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: papassion ... we will eventually end up with a government with Sharia law. They will settle the gay marriage issue once and for all. Are you so fucking stupid that you don't realize that Sharia Law would eliminate Gay marriage? Pot, meet Kettle. Are you so fucking stupid that you don't understand sarcasm? -SD-

Hillwilliam -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 7:16:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SadistDave quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: papassion ... we will eventually end up with a government with Sharia law. They will settle the gay marriage issue once and for all. Are you so fucking stupid that you don't realize that Sharia Law would eliminate Gay marriage? Pot, meet Kettle. Are you so fucking stupid that you don't understand sarcasm? -SD- I recognize someone looking out for their friends when I see it. If you had bothered to pay fucking attention on here, you'd see that papassion is HARD Right Wing in his posts. He isn't being sarcastic. He's being ignorantly serious.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Federal appeals court rules Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional (5/31/2012 7:20:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Buy your Bed, bath and beyond, Pier 1 and Crate and barrel stock before everyone else catches on. [8D] Oh, honey.. you are so not gay! Bed, Bath and Beyond? Really? No, just no. Think Williams-Sonoma & Kohler. [8D] Pier1.. hehehe ... you're so cute. [;)] What can I say. Straight white male here. Closest I've been to gay was a college roommate for a coupla years. Cool dude and a badass chess player as was his BF.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625