Washington A federal judge in Massachusetts has thrown a hand grenade into the middle of the culture war. By ruling Thursday that the Defense of Marriage Act which bars the federal government from recognizing gay marriage is unconstitutional, US District Court Judge Joseph Tauro has also shined a spotlight on how the Obama administration is working at cross-purposes on the law. President Obama has called the law known as DOMA abhorrent and pledged to overturn it. But his Justice Department has defended the laws constitutionality in court and is expected to appeal Judge Tauros ruling to the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Obama administration walks tricky political line on gay marriage ban - Yahoo! News intellectual dishonesty is a start
So tricky is what they are calling it eh. Moronic is more like it. He thinks he can have it both ways. Just like he thinks he can claim Federal supremacy as it pertains to the Arizona Law, and ignore Sanctuary cities.
Here's the trick to the agenda shell game. While the judge ruled it un-Constitutional because of the tenth amendment and states rights. This will be used to force all states to obey Mass gay marriage law. which goes against states rights.
From a governace standpoint, marriage is nothing more than a civil contract. As far as the government ought to be concerned, denying anybody the right to enter into that contract should be found unconstitutional. What this really show us is that government ought to stay the hell out of this issue, but it cannot because marriage plays out in so many other legal and financial aspects of our lives.
Not possible, President Obama used up all his hypocrisy in his first two months in office and I have a solid source that will swear in a court of law that Joe Biden has staunchly refused on more than one occasion to lend his royal high@ss any of his hypocrisy..... After all you can't spend what you don't have ...... on second thought this is the federal government we're talking about , so what did the President do with the hypocrisy he borrowed from China?
Would it be in keeping with his responsibilities as chief executive to refuse to enforce the DOMA? Is it possible to view a law as abhorrent but yet constitutional?
Er.. No genius since that would be the rule of man instead of the rule of LAW, King George III tried that "I view it thus and thou" nonsense and our founding fathers threw all his tea into Boston Harbor and then kicked his soldiers @sses so we didn't have to put up with despots "viewing" the law as they damn well pleased. SEE: RULE OF LAW SEE ALSO: BLIND PARTISANS THAT DON'T UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE RULE OF LAW AND MERCURIAL DESPOTS.
