ad_email
ad_email_468

3 responses to “President: “Not going to make news” on marriage equality any time soon”

  1. Ted

    I’m glad the President isn’t letting himself be bullied by the gay activist agenda.

  2. Francoise

    Bullied by the activists gay agenda? Now that was a laugh that made my day! We all know who is doing the real bullying here and the real reason why Obama takes a segregationist’s classic Ronald Reagan ‘states rights’ position that is an insult to his own parents who were actually deemed criminals and whose marriage was illegal in may states such that California and Hawaii were amongst the few states in which they were safe.

    Of course the dissembling Obama speaks perfect Ketman and is smart enough to know that this is neither a matter for voters, for Congress, or any state legislature. This is a matter that can and will only be decided by SCOTUS so he’s probably smart not to enter the fray and just work to alter the high court’s composition if he can. But given the position of some current conservative justices who have ruled in our favor in the past, and considering the no-brainer legal dynamic, I really don’t think we need to fear the court – which is our best hope. As the late SCOTUS Justice Robert H. Jackson wrote,

    “The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to WITHDRAW CERTAIN SUBJECTS FROM THE VICISSITUDES OF POLITICAL CONTROVERSY, TO PLACE THEM BEYOND THE REACH OF MAJORITIES AND OFFICIALS AND TO ESTABLISH THEM AS LEGAL PRINCIPLES TO BE APPLIED BY THE COURTS. One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS MAY NOT BE SUBMITTED TO VOTE; THEY DEPEND ON THE OUTCOME OF NO ELECTIONS.”

    Thanks Lisa for an excellent report. Really. Without editorializing too much I think you have made the best contribution when it comes to informing the community. Much remains to be done. The very fact that Obama can appear before an LGBT audience and so cavalierly toss over the ‘states rights’ insult and get away with it with nary a bubble of protest from the so-called “bullies’ of the “gay activist agenda” is proof positive that, not only are too many of our ‘’activists’ toothless lap dog sycophants, our own leadership has left the lay community disgracefully ignorant of the no-brainer legal dynamic at play here.

    We can understand why Obama plays this cynical game of cat and mouse but in a game of cat and mouse, it’s usually the cat that wins. Obama will do as he feels he must do, but it’s a disgrace and dis-service to the Community when journalists no only pander to the same legal ignorance but lack the guts to call this so-called ‘civil rights lawyer’ out on the most rudimentary legal rubbish. I understand that it’s a calculated PR strategy but, frankly, pandering to ignorance at the same time we fuel it is not much of a strategy. Obama claims to revere Lincoln but he is clearly more of a dissembling Jefferson whose own children were given over to the hammer of the auction block. President Obama and the LBGT leadership b ut to paraphrase Lincoln, “I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth [and educated in basic law], they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts [and educate them as to the bedrock law of our land].”

  3. Mombian » Blog Archive » Weekly Political Roundup

    [...] President Obama continued to avoid answering questions about his stance on marriage equality. [...]

Leave a Reply

Your support keeps us going. Thank you!

Your support keeps us going. Thank you!

A Closer Look

Supreme Court: Which case makes the best case for marriage equality?

The U.S. Supreme Court could announce as early as Tuesday (September 30) which marriage equality case –or cases— it will accept for review this session. But, while the Court has seven marriage equality cases to choose from during its private working conference Monday (September 29), it may not choose any of those seven for review. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg hinted as much in public remarks last week.

» more


Breaking News

Polis tries parliamentary maneuver in hopes of moving ENDA to the floor

Because House Speaker John Boehner has vowed to block ENDA from getting a vote, the discharge petition has become the only hope to force ENDA to the floor if the Republican-dominated chamber. U.S. Rep. Jared Polis, with the backing of Democratic House leaders, filed a petition with the House clerk. It’s a long-shot but ENDA supporters need to find just 16 signatures to get the ball rolling.

» more


Sixth Circuit GOP judges: Why not let the voters decide who gets to marry?

The three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals seemed to signal pretty clearly where they’re headed on the six marriage equality lawsuits they heard arguments in Wednesday: toward the first federal appeals ruling to undo lower court rulings that held state bans on marriage for same-sex couples to be unconstitutional.

» more


Fourth Circuit panel votes 2 to 1 to strike Virginia’s same-sex marriage ban

It was clear from the oral argument that two out of three of the judges on a Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel would vote on opposite sides concerning the constitutionality of Virginia’s ban on same-sex marriage. The question was how the third judge would vote. That question was answered Monday: He voted against the ban.

» more


President signs historic executive order

President Obama this morning (July 21) signed a long-sought executive order prohibiting contractors who do business with the federal government from discriminating based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and adding to existing protection (which includes sexual orientation) for federal employees a prohibition of discrimination based on gender identity.

» more


Legal activists call Hobby Lobby decision ‘radical’ and will require vigilance to protect LGBT equality

Some LGBT legal activists say today’s decision in a U.S. Supreme Court religious exemption case amounts to a “dangerous and radical departure from existing law that creates far more questions than it answers.”

Saying it is not providing a “shield for employers who might cloak illegal discrimination as a religious practice,” a 5 to 4 majority of the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today (June 30) that a federal law may not require a closely held commercial employer to provide health insurance coverage for contraception if that employer claims that to do so violates his or her personal religious beliefs.

» more