Did Obama con us?

[kara speltz]

I actually cried the day I voted for Barack Obama! But now I'm beginning to believe that he's just another lying politician. Check out this recent Dept. of (In)Justice position in defending DOMA!

Friday, June 12, 2009
Obama defends DOMA in federal court. Says banning gay marriage is good for the federal budget. Invokes incest and marrying children.
by John Aravosis (DC) on 6/12/2009 09:44:00 AM
UPDATE: Mormon Bush holdover helped write and file anti-gay DOMA brief.

UPDATE: Gay groups rip Obama.

UPDATE: Are gay politicians going to continue hosting gay pride fundraiser for Joe Biden?

UPDATE: Obama spokesman caught lying to Politico.

Joe and I have been trying since last night to get a copy of the government's brief just filed in this case. This is not the GLAD case that we've written about previously, it's another in California.

We just got the brief from reader Lavi Soloway. It's pretty despicable, and gratuitously homophobic. It reads as if it were written by one of George Bush's top political appointees. I cannot state strongly enough how damaging this brief is to us. 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.

Holy cow. Obama invoked incest and people marrying children.
The courts have followed this principle, moreover, in relation to the validity of marriages performed in other States. Both the First and Second Restatements of Conflict of Laws recognize that State courts may refuse to give effect to a marriage, or to certain incidents of a marriage, that contravene the forum State's policy. See Restatement (First) of Conflict of Laws § 134; Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 284.5 And the courts have widely held that certain marriages performed elsewhere need not be given effect, because they conflicted with the public policy of the forum. See, e.g., Catalano v. Catalano, 170 A.2d 726, 728-29 (Conn. 1961) (marriage of uncle to niece, "though valid in Italy under its laws, was not valid in Connecticut because it contravened the public policy of th[at] state"); Wilkins v. Zelichowski, 140 A.2d 65, 67-68 (N.J. 1958) (marriage of 16-year-old female held invalid in New Jersey, regardless of validity in Indiana where performed, in light of N.J. policy reflected in statute permitting adult female to secure annulment of her underage marriage); In re Mortenson's Estate, 316 P.2d 1106 (Ariz. 1957) (marriage of first cousins held invalid in Arizona, though lawfully performed in New Mexico, given Arizona policy reflected in statute declaring such marriages "prohibited and void").
Then in the next paragraph, they argue that the incest and child rape cases therefore make DOMA constitutional:
The fact that States have long had the authority to decline to give effect to marriages performed in other States based on the forum State's public policy strongly supports the constitutionality of Congress's exercise of its authority in DOMA.

http://tinyurl.com/n4ysvr (AmericaBlog)

My heart is breaking as I read this. Kara

[scott snedeker]

In various parts of his Campaign, when pinned down, Obama has stated that he felt marriage was valid only between a man and a woman.

It is unclear whether this reflects "lifeboat politics" or a genuinely myopic view that sexual orientation is not a trait by which people are defined and targeted for oppression as a minority group, and therefore not entitled to be recognized and defended from oppression.

Define a minority as nonexistent and their rights also become nonexistent so protecting and defending them becomes unnecessary and accountability of a government for failing to protect them disappears.

Either way the rights of Gay folk are currently Constitutionally compromised. When the Law of the Land is unjust, the logical necessary approach is civil disobedience.

In either circumstance is important is to demonstrate repeatedly, intensely, and without threat that we exist a people and we are oppressed as a people. But more important is to show that we are united as a people, we are visible as a people and that we are entitled as a people to the same protection as any other oppressed minority, from the denial of civil rights.

I don't think Obama is unreasonable and I think he is capable of getting this message if it is clearly and frequently delivered. It's also more than one Man in the White House who needs to receive this message. It's the entire country.

"We will meet your ability to inflict suffering with our capacity to endure suffering...We will wear you down with our capacity to suffer, and in winning our victory we will not only win our freedom, we will so appeal to your heart and your conscience that we will win you in the process... but we cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws," ---MLK

The march on Washington is October 11, 2009.

I will be there. We all need to be there.

[baumgrenze]

Here are some notes on this subject from a longtime PFLAG dad. I, too, thought that our new president was more open-minded than he now appears to be. On this issue, he sounds more and more to the right of Dick Cheney every day.

In California, the Attorney General, Jerry Brown, filed an amicus brief in support of the federal case to overturn Prop 8. See:

http://www.gayapolis.com/news/artdisplay.php?artid=1943

At the same time, both he and the governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, urged a federal judge to keep Proposition 8 in force for now....See:

http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/...255?source=rss

So 'fence sitting' is still the order of the day out here.

My wife and I discussed this topic while we were on our walk yesterday. Has anyone made the point that this isn't really like Loving vs. Virginia. When that case was decided, African Americans could marry African Americans without being sanctioned. It was about 'mixed race marriage.' We are not advocating for 'mixed gender identity marriages.' That is the province of Exodus and their friends. We just want the right for like to marry like. Perhaps this point needs clarification for those who cannot see?

John

[Gennee]

You're right about Obama saying he believes that marriage is between one man and one woman. No surprise there. It might be me but why does marriage need to be defended? It will always be here so to me this bill is useless just as DADT is useless.

Gennee

[tdogg]

Scotty I'll be there for the march as well!!

I feel a bit conned. So far, in regards to issues that are vital to me, I have seen no real change. I'm waiting, and trying to believe, but getting less real to me every day. I'm still hoping, but we have 3.5 more years so if status quo continues, then I'll be voting for change yet again as I put my mark next to a different name than Obama.

[Daniel]

There is an interesting perspective on all this via an interview that Barney Frank gave to GQ.

http://men.style.com/gq/blogs/gqedit...-frank-qa.html

Okay, fair enough. But I’m curious how you feel about where gay marriage is right now. Is it disappointing that you now have this young Democratic president, this young black Democratic president, who still won’t come out for—

Not really. Because he’s been so good on everything else. And, uh, I understand the political reality. I was not in favor of his coming out for same-sex marriage when he first got elected. But I would hope he would be by the time he runs for reelection.

You would hope he would be, but you weren’t in favor of him doing so in 2008?

I think it would have given the opposition help they didn’t need.

So do you think Obama doesn’t really feel that there should be same-sex marriage? Or was it just a political—

I don’t know what’s in his heart of hearts. I do know that it was…The general view, which I shared, was that no one who wanted to get elected president could have been a supporter of same-sex marriage. On the other hand, things have moved very far since then, and I’m more optimistic about 2012 than I was about same-sex marriage.

Is Obama a pragmatist? That's one way to look at it. Is his personal religious view at odds with his politics? Another good question.

Know what? Whenever Obama has talked about the issue of gay marriage, he comes across as an uptight straight white man. I've never forgotten his appearance at the LOGO debate. His body language said: "I don't want to be here!" And that's what I still hear from him. Me sense is that he intellectually understands what the deal is, but he'd rather not have to deal with it. And now that he's in office? Well...he doesn't have to do anything he doesn't want to do. Guess what? I think that is very good. I think that Obama should stay out of our way.

We don't need a savior!

[bnmoore]

Just curious and it's a little late now but have you ever read the Green Party platform?

I live in the 4th district in GA and voted for my former Congress Person last November.

If nothing else you could give this a read:

http://www.gp.org/tenkey.shtml

Ben N. Moore

[scott snedeker]

Originally Posted by Daniel

Me sense is that he intellectually understands what the deal is, but he'd rather not have to deal with it. And now that he's in office? Well...he doesn't have to do anything he doesn't want to do. Guess what? I think that is very good. [I]I think that Obama should stay out of our way.

We don't need a savior!

Agreed! We must do it ourselves!

See you in October!

ps: Posting in Cockney are we Daniel?

[scott snedeker]

Originally Posted by bnmoore

Every human being deserves a say in the decisions that affect their lives and not be subject to the will of another. Therefore, we will work to increase public participation at every level of government and to ensure that our public representatives are fully accountable to the people who elect them. We will also work to create new types of political organizations which expand the process of participatory democracy by directly including citizens in the decision-making process.

2. SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
All persons should have the rights and opportunity to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment. We must consciously confront in ourselves, our organizations, and society at large, barriers such as racism and class oppression, sexism and homophobia, ageism and disability, which act to deny fair treatment and equal justice under the law.

3. ECOLOGICAL WISDOM
Human societies must operate with the understanding that we are part of nature, not separate from nature. We must maintain an ecological balance and live within the ecological and resource limits of our communities and our planet. We support a sustainable society which utilizes resources in such a way that future generations will benefit and not suffer from the practices of our generation. To this end we must practice agriculture which replenishes the soil; move to an energy efficient economy; and live in ways that respect the integrity of natural systems.

4. NON-VIOLENCE
It is essential that we develop effective alternatives to society’s current patterns of violence. We will work to demilitarize, and eliminate weapons of mass destruction, without being naive about the intentions of other governments. We recognize the need for self-defense and the defense of others who are in helpless situations. We promote non-violent methods to oppose practices and policies with which we disagree, and will guide our actions toward lasting personal, community and global peace.

5. DECENTRALIZATION
Centralization of wealth and power contributes to social and economic injustice, environmental destruction, and militarization. Therefore, we support a restructuring of social, political and economic institutions away from a system which is controlled by and mostly benefits the powerful few, to a democratic, less bureaucratic system. Decision-making should, as much as possible, remain at the individual and local level, while assuring that civil rights are protected for all citizens.

6. COMMUNITY-BASED ECONOMICS AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE
We recognize it is essential to create a vibrant and sustainable economic system, one that can create jobs and provide a decent standard of living for all people while maintaining a healthy ecological balance. A successful economic system will offer meaningful work with dignity, while paying a “living wage” which reflects the real value of a person’s work.

Local communities must look to economic development that assures protection of the environment and workers’ rights; broad citizen participation in planning; and enhancement of our “quality of life.” We support independently owned and operated companies which are socially responsible, as well as co-operatives and public enterprises that distribute resources and control to more people through democratic participation.

7. FEMINISM AND GENDER EQUITY
We have inherited a social system based on male domination of politics and economics. We call for the replacement of the cultural ethics of domination and control with more cooperative ways of interacting that respect differences of opinion and gender. Human values such as equity between the sexes, interpersonal responsibility, and honesty must be developed with moral conscience. We should remember that the process that determines our decisions and actions is just as important as achieving the outcome we want.

8. RESPECT FOR DIVERSITY
We believe it is important to value cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious and spiritual diversity, and to promote the development of respectful relationships across these lines.

We believe that the many diverse elements of society should be reflected in our organizations and decision-making bodies, and we support the leadership of people who have been traditionally closed out of leadership roles. We acknowledge and encourage respect for other life forms than our own and the preservation of biodiversity.

9. PERSONAL AND GLOBAL RESPONSIBILITY
We encourage individuals to act to improve their personal well-being and, at the same time, to enhance ecological balance and social harmony. We seek to join with people and organizations around the world to foster peace, economic justice, and the health of the planet.

10. FUTURE FOCUS AND SUSTAINABILITY
Our actions and policies should be motivated by long-term goals. We seek to protect valuable natural resources, safely disposing of or “unmaking” all waste we create, while developing a sustainable economics that does not depend on continual expansion for survival. We must counterbalance the drive for short-term profits by assuring that economic development, new technologies, and fiscal policies are responsible to future generations who will inherit the results of our actions.

Ten Key Values from other state and local Greens.
There is no authoritative version of the Ten Key Values of the Greens. The Ten Key Values are guiding principles that are adapted and defined to fit each state and local chapter.

Love it!! I hope more people start to see that there is an alternative to "Whigs and Tories"

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by scott snedeker

Agreed! We must do it ourselves!

See you in October!

ps: Posting in Cockney are we Daniel?

Cockeyed optimist?

Oh......Cockney'd? That's a different matter. Not as tuneful though. Take it away Julie!

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by scott snedeker

The march on Washington is October 11, 2009.

I will be there. We all need to be there.

I'll be there.


Rick

[tdogg]

Then we are all going to have to find each other!!! we can't all be there and miss out on meeting in 3D.

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by tdogg

Then we are all going to have to find each other!!! we can't all be there and miss out on meeting in 3D.

That's a great idea Tdogg! It will be great to finally get to meet you guys. And let's make sure to bring our 3D glasses.


Rick

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by Daniel

Cockeyed optimist?

Oh......Cockney'd? That's a different matter. Not as tuneful though. Take it away Julie!

Thanks Daniel for the video. I've liked that lady ever since she parachuted down to earth in that Disney movie and babysitted those kids.


Rick

[Matt Algren]

Originally Posted by Daniel

There is an interesting perspective on all this via an interview that Barney Frank gave to GQ.

http://men.style.com/gq/blogs/gqedit...-frank-qa.html




Is Obama a pragmatist? That's one way to look at it. Is his personal religious view at odds with his politics? Another good question.

Know what? Whenever Obama has talked about the issue of gay marriage, he comes across as an uptight straight white man. I've never forgotten his appearance at the LOGO debate. His body language said: "I don't want to be here!" And that's what I still hear from him. Me sense is that he intellectually understands what the deal is, but he'd rather not have to deal with it. And now that he's in office? Well...he doesn't have to do anything he doesn't want to do. Guess what? I think that is very good. I think that Obama should stay out of our way.

We don't need a savior!

No, but it would be nice if he weren't actually doing harm. This DOMA thing does so much damage. The Administration argued that gay marriage is too expensive, that we can get straight married like everybody else, that Loving v. Virginia is irrelevant, that it infringes on no one's rights...

We know these arguments to be hogwash, but the administration gave them a fresh coat of credibility last week. As someone else (I don't remember who) pointed out, the Obama administration (endorsed by President Obama) handed the Religious Right 54 pages of downright evil propaganda. Now they can turn around and tell their supporters "See? Even Libral Muslim B. Hussein Obama agrees with us!"

No more waiting. No more hoping for the best. No more playing Old Maid and hoping he has some twos. No more shrugging our shoulders and thinking that there's no alternative. I was a cautious proponent of the October 11 march before; now I'm gassing up the car and marking the calendar.

[tdogg]

Originally Posted by Rick336

Thanks Daniel for the video. I've liked that lady ever since she parachuted down to earth in that Disney movie and babysitted those kids.

Rick

I've always had a crush on Mary Poppins. She is one hot nanny.

I love 3D glasses, have two pair. I'll be sure to bring them to DC!

[Rick336]

Originally Posted by Matt Algren

No more waiting. No more hoping for the best. No more playing Old Maid and hoping he has some twos. No more shrugging our shoulders and thinking that there's no alternative. I was a cautious proponent of the October 11 march before; now I'm gassing up the car and marking the calendar.

Hell yeah! I'm hoping that lots of other LGBT people are planning to do the same thing.

It's the 40th anniversary of Stonewall and the 30th anniversary of our first march on Washington and we still don't have basic human rights.

I mean, damn! What's it going to take?

Rick

[Matt Algren]

Originally Posted by Rick336

Hell yeah! I'm hoping that lots of other LGBT people are planning to do the same thing.

It's the 40th anniversary of Stonewall and the 30th anniversary of our first march on Washington and we still don't have basic human rights.

I mean, damn! What's it going to take?

Rick

It's also National Coming Out Day, and October 12th is the anniversary of Matthew Shepard's death.

[Daniel]

Signed a memo (not an executive order) today giving gay federal employees some benefits. Unfortunately, health care benefits and SS were not among them. However, Obama needs Congress to change the law. He declared that he would work with Congress to get this done.

It this a little balm in the wound from earlier in the week? Oh....maybe just a tiny bit.

But I don't think we should let up on the heat for moment.

[tdogg]

Toss me a crumb and I'll only demand a full meal more ferociously. It's too little, but not too late. We must stand up, stand together and refuse to let up until Obama and Congress do the right thing and fulfill promises.

Little bits of fluff here and there just serves to further my resolve and my need to become involved and make my voice heard. Let's go make some noise in DC!