It is currently Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:00 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Unemployed Need Not Apply
PostPosted: Wed Mar 02, 2011 3:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 1:05 pm
Posts: 759
Location: Colorado, USA
Quote:
Quote:
They are chosing to "stop defending" the defense of marriage act, thus deciding which laws they think they should enforce.


They are still enforcing DOMA until it is either repealed by Congress or there are some definitive court ruling as to the consitutionality of the disputed Section 3. See here.

You really should get your information from someone besides Fox News.


Well that's funny you mention fox news:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/2 ... 27134.html
Huffington Post is biased too, right?

Reading comprehension for the win? This is a direct quote from the letter.
Quote:
After careful consideration, including review of a recommendation from me, the President of the United States has made the determination that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA"), 1 U.S.C. § 7, as applied to same-sex couples who are legally married under state law, violates the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 530D, I am writing to advise you of the Executive Branch's determination and to inform you of the steps the Department will take in two pending DOMA cases to implement that determination.


Quote:
The President has also concluded that Section 3 of DOMA, as applied to legally married same-sex couples, fails to meet that standard and is therefore unconstitutional. Given that conclusion, the President has instructed the Department not to defend the statute in Windsor and Pedersen, now pending in the Southern District of New York and the District of Connecticut. I concur in this determination.


Seems pretty crystal clear to me.

_________________
Gaming HTPC: Antec NSK-2480/ Antec EW430 Bronze/ i5-2400/ MSI H67/ Ninja-Mini/ 4GB DDR3/ 500GB WD Sata 3.0/ XFX HD6850/ Windows 7 x64/ Toshiba 46" 1080p LED/LCD TV


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unemployed Need Not Apply
PostPosted: Wed Mar 02, 2011 10:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Posts: 523
Location: 128.0.0.1
djkest wrote:
Reading comprehension for the win? (...) Seems pretty crystal clear to me.


You're embarassing yourself. Direct quote from the letter:

Quote:
Notwithstanding this determination, the President has informed me that Section 3 will continue to be enforced by the Executive Branch. To that end, the President has instructed Executive agencies to continue to comply with Section 3 of DOMA, consistent with the Executive's obligation to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, unless and until Congress repeals Section 3 or the judicial branch renders a definitive verdict against the law's constitutionality.


It's on page 5. Attention span for the win?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unemployed Need Not Apply
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:12 am
Posts: 2831
Location: USA
djkest wrote:
Well that's funny you mention fox news:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/2 ... 27134.html
Huffington Post is biased too, right?

Reading comprehension for the win? This is a direct quote from the letter.
Quote:
After careful consideration, including review of a recommendation from me, the President of the United States has made the determination that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA"), 1 U.S.C. § 7, as applied to same-sex couples who are legally married under state law, violates the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 530D, I am writing to advise you of the Executive Branch's determination and to inform you of the steps the Department will take in two pending DOMA cases to implement that determination.


Quote:
The President has also concluded that Section 3 of DOMA, as applied to legally married same-sex couples, fails to meet that standard and is therefore unconstitutional. Given that conclusion, the President has instructed the Department not to defend the statute in Windsor and Pedersen, now pending in the Southern District of New York and the District of Connecticut. I concur in this determination.


Seems pretty crystal clear to me.

What is clear is that the Obama Administration is not defending the law in the current lawsuits before the courts, but they are still enforcing the law (until such time as the law "may" be struck down by the courts) since they are sworn to faithfully execute the laws of the United States.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unemployed Need Not Apply
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2011 5:51 pm 
Offline
*Lifetime Patron*

Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 6:21 pm
Posts: 4247
Location: Undisclosed but sober in US
djkest wrote:
The current administation seems fine penalizing and fining and taxing and regulating our "free markets" to their own whims.


Really? BP did a lot of suffering, did it? Goldman? AIG?

You think maybe collapsing a global economy deserves slightly more than a slap on the wrist?

_________________
People who put money and political ideology ahead of truth and ethics are neither patriots nor human beings.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group