shirtlifterbear (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
shirtlifterbear) wrote2009-06-12 12:01 pm
shirtlifterbear) wrote2009-06-12 12:01 pm
President Bigot Obama Is An Enemy Of Gay People
An active and powerful enemy who looked us in the eyes and lied, lied, lied.
This post is about the current United States Department of Justice anti-Gay Civil Rights motion to dismiss filed about the anti-Defense of Marriage Act case currently working its way through the courts. (By orders of the President we helped elect, the Constitutional Law professor.) He is an anti-gay bigot, and a liar, an oathbreaker. He promised us to get rid of DADT, and he just defended it in a Supreme Court hearing. He promised us to get rid of DOMA, and now he's arguing that it's good law, and that Gay people don't deserve civil rights protections. I'm so angry that I can't see straight.
And if anyone wants to try to play apologist for him after this? Please defriend me, because this is active, explicit and intentional work against the LGBT community, and is completely indefensible, and if you try, I don't want to be associated with you in any context. You're either in favor of Gay Civil Rights OR you're in favor of the President of the United States, because he has just made it impossible to be both. And those of you who attacked me for being a Gay man supporting Hillary in the Democratic primaries because "Obama is so much better on our issues"? You were lied to by your candidate, willfully and evilly. The only reason he would risk this attack is if he believes in it strongly, if it MATTERS to him. He is an enemy, and WANTS this fight. I am afraid of what the President will try to do to us.
From Towleroad:
"DOJ Defends DOMA, Says Good for Budget, Invokes Incest
Americablog has been busy at work parsing the briefs from the Department of Justice's motion to dismiss the federal same-sex marriage case brought by Smelt and Hammer. There's plenty more to read.
Of the DOJ's rationalization, they write:
"Obama didn't just argue a technicality about the case, he argued that DOMA is reasonable. That DOMA is constitutional. That DOMA wasn't motivated by any anti-gay animus. He argued why our Supreme Court victories in Roemer and Lawrence shouldn't be interpreted to give us rights in any other area (which hurts us in countless other cases and battles). He argued that DOMA doesn't discriminate against us because it also discriminates about straight unmarried couples (ignoring the fact that they can get married and we can't).
"He actually argued that the courts shouldn't consider Loving v. Virginia, the miscegenation case in which the Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional to ban interracial marriages, when looking at gay civil rights cases. He told the court, in essence, that blacks deserve more civil rights than gays, that our civil rights are not on the same level.
"And before Obama claims he didn't have a choice, he had a choice. Bush, Reagan and Clinton all filed briefs in court opposing current federal law as being unconstitutional (we'll be posting more about that later). Obama could have done the same. But instead he chose to defend DOMA, denigrate our civil rights, go back on his promises, and contradict his own statements that DOMA was "abhorrent." Folks, Obama's lawyers are even trying to diminish the impact of Roemer and Lawrence, our only two big Supreme Court victories. Obama is quite literally destroying our civil rights gains with this brief. He's taking us down for his own benefit."
EDITED TO ADD: here's the link to the document: http://www.towleroad.com/2009/06/doj-defends-doma-says-good-for-budget-invokes-incest.html
This post is about the current United States Department of Justice anti-Gay Civil Rights motion to dismiss filed about the anti-Defense of Marriage Act case currently working its way through the courts. (By orders of the President we helped elect, the Constitutional Law professor.) He is an anti-gay bigot, and a liar, an oathbreaker. He promised us to get rid of DADT, and he just defended it in a Supreme Court hearing. He promised us to get rid of DOMA, and now he's arguing that it's good law, and that Gay people don't deserve civil rights protections. I'm so angry that I can't see straight.
And if anyone wants to try to play apologist for him after this? Please defriend me, because this is active, explicit and intentional work against the LGBT community, and is completely indefensible, and if you try, I don't want to be associated with you in any context. You're either in favor of Gay Civil Rights OR you're in favor of the President of the United States, because he has just made it impossible to be both. And those of you who attacked me for being a Gay man supporting Hillary in the Democratic primaries because "Obama is so much better on our issues"? You were lied to by your candidate, willfully and evilly. The only reason he would risk this attack is if he believes in it strongly, if it MATTERS to him. He is an enemy, and WANTS this fight. I am afraid of what the President will try to do to us.
From Towleroad:
"DOJ Defends DOMA, Says Good for Budget, Invokes Incest
Americablog has been busy at work parsing the briefs from the Department of Justice's motion to dismiss the federal same-sex marriage case brought by Smelt and Hammer. There's plenty more to read.
Of the DOJ's rationalization, they write:
"Obama didn't just argue a technicality about the case, he argued that DOMA is reasonable. That DOMA is constitutional. That DOMA wasn't motivated by any anti-gay animus. He argued why our Supreme Court victories in Roemer and Lawrence shouldn't be interpreted to give us rights in any other area (which hurts us in countless other cases and battles). He argued that DOMA doesn't discriminate against us because it also discriminates about straight unmarried couples (ignoring the fact that they can get married and we can't).
"He actually argued that the courts shouldn't consider Loving v. Virginia, the miscegenation case in which the Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional to ban interracial marriages, when looking at gay civil rights cases. He told the court, in essence, that blacks deserve more civil rights than gays, that our civil rights are not on the same level.
"And before Obama claims he didn't have a choice, he had a choice. Bush, Reagan and Clinton all filed briefs in court opposing current federal law as being unconstitutional (we'll be posting more about that later). Obama could have done the same. But instead he chose to defend DOMA, denigrate our civil rights, go back on his promises, and contradict his own statements that DOMA was "abhorrent." Folks, Obama's lawyers are even trying to diminish the impact of Roemer and Lawrence, our only two big Supreme Court victories. Obama is quite literally destroying our civil rights gains with this brief. He's taking us down for his own benefit."
EDITED TO ADD: here's the link to the document: http://www.towleroad.com/2009/06/doj-defends-doma-says-good-for-budget-invokes-incest.html
no subject
Well, I am still trying to process this one.
I remember during the campaign I agreed with another journaler that said he supported Obama but was a realist and thought that Obama would throw the gays under the bus in the first year (and that Obama contrary to making sweeping promises on DOMA--more like qualified suggestions imo-had all but promised he would toss the gays under the bus)... and then I remember being pretty mucht attacked by another gay who said he was convinced (despite evidence to the contrary) that Obama was the gays biggest friend AND ANYONE WHO DIDN'T KNOW THAT WAS A BIG OLD DOODY-HEAD. (I'm paraphrasing...)
Having said all that, I don't trust AmericaBlog screed on almost anything. I un-friended them a long time ago (they were on my lj feed reader). IMO, t are sensationalist drama queens with their panties eternally in a wad (they lost me originally on their "insane" rants-imo again-against trans issues on ENDA).
I'm not ready to give up on Obama yet. But I am perplexed and not happy about the latest--though I had few illusions just a lot of hope.
Does this mean I have to de-friend you?
no subject
Hell no!
You haven't tried to convince me that this action on his part is in any way good, or just, or part of some secret plan that will all work out over the rainbow!
no subject
I do argue that he never promised to be a good gay ally and actually telegraphed this move--though not the evil take AmericaBlog has on it--quite a while ago.
no subject
Nothing.
NOT ONE WORD.
I feel awful for them, truly, because they BELIEVED in him so strongly, and that faith has been utterly betrayed.
no subject
As a matter of fact, that's the first thing I thought (probably not the best thing to think) when I read this DOMA news, "Well he utter a word."
On the other hand my lj friend who wrote "Let's be realistic ... Obama's throwing us under the bus ... " has also graciously been quiet, instead of being all up on the I TOLD YOU SO's.
Maybe they're just all over on Facebook with the other cool kids.