![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shirtlifterbearAn 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
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-06-13 02:20 am (UTC)And while we are waiting, society is actually changing. Isn't that what we really want, anyway? Iowa, of all places, has legislatively allowed gay marriage! New Hampshire! Fucking MAINE. We are making solid progress, in the face of loud opposition. Yes, there have been more setbacks than steps forward. But today the governor of New York told his legislature to get their asses in gear to remove the barriers to gay marriage.
And Jerry Brown just filed a brief supporting the repeal of Proposition H8. Schwarzenegger is expected to do the same.
This doesn't mean that I in any way let the President or the administration off the hook. What was said today by the DOJ was reprehensible and irresponsible. It would not surprise me if there was an amendment to the statement made later. I AM trying not to be reactive to what I see in the press, and whatever is popular to scream about on any given day.
When Obama took office, I intended to give him two years to make progress in getting things into order, before I started complaining. It will take his term(s), and the next several Presidents', to repair what the Shrub did to our country. I expect nothing in six months except learning to do the job. So far. In two years, however, I will be expecting a lot more.
More food for thought: http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid90000.asp with which I know enough to neither agree nor disagree.
Defriend away. That's not a threat that will change what I know or think, or make me pretend otherwise.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-13 04:42 pm (UTC)B) You make a number of good points.
C) I didn't threaten to defriend anyone. I told people to defriend me if they were going to defend this direct attack on our rights. You certainly did not do that.
D) As I said in another comment, I hope that he has to sign a GODDAMNED CIVIL RIGHTS BILL that's shoved in front of him.