NYT Ediotrial: Obama Made “Bad Call On Gay Rights “
If the administration does feel compelled to defend the act, it should do so in a less hurtful way. It could have crafted its legal arguments in general terms, as a simple description of where it believes the law now stands. There was no need to resort to specious arguments and inflammatory language to impugn same-sex marriage as an institution.
The best approach of all would have been to make clear, even as it defends the law in court, that it is fighting for gay rights. It should work to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the law that bans gay men and lesbians in the military from being open about their sexuality. It should push hard for a federal law banning employment discrimination. It should also work to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act in Congress.
The administration has had its hands full with the financial crisis, health care, Guantánamo Bay and other pressing matters. In times like these, issues like repealing the marriage act can seem like a distraction — or a political liability. But busy calendars and political expediency are no excuse for making one group of Americans wait any longer for equal rights. See NYT: Obama Made “Bad Call On Gay Rights … Disturbing”
* Tags = gay men gay news lesbian news transgender bisexual
| Published by |
 |
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/nyt-ediotrial…
LGBT Legal And Advocacy Groups Decry Obama Administration’s Defense of DOMA
We disagree with many of the administration’s arguments, for example, that DOMA is a valid exercise of Congress’s power, is consistent with Equal Protection or Due Process principles, and does not impinge upon rights that are recognized as fundamental.
We are also extremely disturbed by a new and nonsensical argument the administration has advanced suggesting that the federal government needs to be “neutral” with regard to its treatment of married same-sex couples in order to ensure that federal tax money collected from across the country not be used to assist same-sex couples duly married by their home states. There is nothing “neutral” about the federal government’s discriminatory denial of fair treatment to married same-sex couples: DOMA wrongly bars the federal government from providing any of the over one thousand federal protections to the many thousands of couples who marry in six states. This notion of “neutrality” ignores the fact that while married same-sex couples pay their full share of income and social security taxes, they are prevented by DOMA from receiving the corresponding same benefits that married heterosexual taxpayers receive. It is the married same-sex couples, not heterosexuals in other parts of the country, who are financially and personally damaged in significant ways by DOMA. For the Obama administration to suggest otherwise simply departs from both mathematical and legal reality.
When President Obama was courting lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender voters, he said that he believed that DOMA should be repealed. We ask him to live up to his emphatic campaign promises, to stop making false and damaging legal arguments, and immediately to introduce a bill to repeal DOMA and ensure that every married couple in America has the same access to federal protections.
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/06/lgbt-legal-an…
Proposition 8 backers attack Brown’s efforts to keep gay marriage
Proponents of a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage filed legal briefs today urging the California Supreme Court to reject the novel legal argument put forth last month by state Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown and to preserve Proposition 8, the gay marriage ban approved by voters in November.
“The people have the final word on what the California Constitution says,” lawyers wrote. “The practical result of the Attorney General’s theory is that the people can never amend the Constitution to overrule judicial interpretations of inalienable rights.”
The legal filing comes in response to a brief two weeks ago from the attorney general in which he surprised legal experts by putting forth an unusual theory to argue that Proposition 8 should be invalidated, saying that the measure undermines fundamental liberties guaranteed by the Constitution.
His theory surprised experts because he had pledged to argue in favor of Proposition 8 — as the attorney general, it is his job to defend the state’s laws. But it also advanced an unorthodox interpretation of the Constitution.
See Proposition 8 backers attack Brown’s efforts to keep gay marriage
| Published by |
|
Original source : http://gay_blog.blogspot.com/2009/01/proposition-8…
