• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Morning Bell: Next Step in Congress' Fight for Marriage

    This Wednesday, Attorney General Eric Holder sent his own version of a “Dear John” letter to the Speaker of the House, informing him that President Barack Obama’s Justice Department will no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in federal court. The letter clearly states that the decision was personally made by the President himself, who, supposedly just this week, came to the conclusion that DOMA violates “the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment” of the U.S Constitution. This purely partisan act is completely consistent with both President Obama’s unprecedented politicization of the Justice Department and the same-sex marriage movement’s end-run around for democracy.

    DOMA was enacted by overwhelming majorities of both houses of Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996. DOMA has two core provisions. First, it defines the words marriage, spouse, husband, and wife wherever they appear in the U.S. Code as referring only to the union of a man or a woman. Second, it defends the right of each state not to be forced to accept the redefinition of marriage in a handful of other states as a result of state court decisions or laws. Nearly 40 states have enacted state-level DOMAs, and 31 have embraced traditional marriage in their state constitutions. No state’s voters have ever voted to the contrary.

    President Obama knows all of this. He also knows that his Administration’s litany of failures (unemployment above 8 percent, Guantanamo still open, exploding debt, etc.) has weakened him politically. By now asserting that there is no rational case for defending marriage as the union of one man and one woman, President Obama is echoing the claims of same-sex marriage advocated who portray the defenders of traditional marriage as irrational and bigoted. Nothing could be further from the truth. As Heritage Foundation Senior Research Fellow Chuck Donovan explains, defense of traditional marriage is not only rational but a cornerstone of civil society:

    Marriage is the cornerstone in an archway of values that form the constitution of the family and the foundation of civil society. To its advocates as an institution with a pre-political meaning, it is not an entity created by the state but rather one recognized by the state. It is not about one family, but the coming together of two families, whose role in begetting and bearing children make them not merely part of a community but the creators of community. The community they create is not time-bound, but existing across generations.  … What is at stake is the whole task of society to ensure that as many children as possible are raised by their mothers and fathers.

    There is one silver lining in the President’s decision to call the vast majority of Americans who believe in traditional marriage bigots: Congress now has the opportunity to offer a real defense of marriage in court. Up to this date, the Obama Administration’s fraudulent defense of DOMA in federal court has been characterized by even supporters of same-sex marriage as “collusive litigation.” Congress should defend its rights as a co-equal branch of government under the United States Constitution and fight for marriage.

    This does not mean that Congress needs to vote on DOMA again. DOMA is still good law. It does mean that Congress needs to act to make sure DOMA has effective and aggressive defense in court. Members of Congress, should seek to intervene in the case to assure that DOMA gets the vigorous defense that should be afforded to all federal statutes for which reasonable legal arguments may be offered—and that the President is refusing to provide.

    Quick Hits:

    Posted in Ongoing Priorities [slideshow_deploy]

    96 Responses to Morning Bell: Next Step in Congress' Fight for Marriage

    1. George Colgrove, VA says:

      Man, this is a toughy. It is important, but for Gods sake, there are far better things I want congress to focus on – namely, the growing national debt and ongoing massive annual deficit spending. We can have marriage as defined by tradition nailed down, but when the nation collapses under this debt it wont matter.

      I am sorry to say that this issue is akin to Nero playing the harp while Rome burns. The national debt and the inability for the federal workforce to recognize how severe it is, is akin to a national disaster. After we get massive cuts underway, we can start dealing with these side issues.

      Please keep the congress focused on the single most important issue – the debt. Lets get this country back in the black! There will be time for the rest – later on.

    2. Ken Jarvis - Las Veg says:

      2- 25 -11 FROM – Ken Jarvis – LVKen7@Gmail.com

      Union Workers "are paid up to 30% MORE

      than those in the Private Sector."

      WSJ 2-24-11 page – A15

      ===

      They keep telling us, Govt Workers, in Wisc, make more $$$

      than Private sector employees.

      WHY?

      Govt Workers BELONG TO A UNION.

      To make MORE $$$ – JOIN A UNION.

    3. Nancy Magee West Che says:

      If president Obama is against traditional marriage, WHY IS HE MARRIED TO A WOMAN?

      Morning Bell: Thank you for keeping the American public informed as to just what is going on with this, I cannot find an appropriate adjective, rotten man and his union cronies in our Nation's Capitol. He needs to go next election.

    4. NCT, Colorado says:

      Now Oblama has decided he is the Supreme Court. Great – we can cut the Court expenses from the federal budget or spend the money on something else – like buying votes for the next election, all on the tax payers' dime.

    5. Andrew, VA says:

      Sorry, but marriage — straight or gay — is not a federal issue just like education and health care. Heritage can't have it both ways — and be taken seriously in a policy debate.

    6. Shawn Overcash says:

      This is one issue around which conservatives need to wake up and get over their squeamishness. Conservatives are also progressive, but, as Edmund Burke points out, we do it cautiously. There is no reason why in the 21st century gay people can't enjoy every privilege afforded to hetrosexuals. Gays are bright, successful and conservative on most issues! Excluding them from the table is a tragic mistake and a throwback to the days of hate-inspired prejudice.

    7. Jill-Maine says:

      Marriage is not a right, it's a covenant between a man and a woman and God. That's if it is done according to the way God planned it. It is not a sexual contract. It is the foundation of society and originally intended to be a promise to stay together, in sickness and in health, forsaking all others etc. Not to mention passing on the faith to the children created in that union. God intended for us to raise our own children. Therefore a stable society.

      If Homosexuals get the right to marry it won't end there. Next in line are poligamists and I only wonder whose next after that. I am not a bigot but I strongly believe marriage should not be redefined.

    8. Blair Franconia, NH says:

      Why does Obama stick his nose into places it doesn't belong?

    9. Mary............WI says:

      I sure hope Congress steps up to the plate in defense of marriage between a man and a woman. A persons sexual preference is none of my business. However, marriage between a man and a woman has been around, for sure, since the Bible was written. DOMA needs to stay in place as cureently written. Just because OBAMA has decided on his own that the definition should change to include same sex marriages is a joke! Aren't there more important issues to contend with!

      BO is sinking fast…hope he takes Obamacare with him.

    10. Daniel Hollywood, Ch says:

      We have to defend the DOMA Act, little by little this President is dismantling our Constitution to his liking. By doing this his is losing the Independent voting block, he has already lost most moderates by his actions. Public opinion is slowly going against him so his next step is to try to lock in the Gay Voting Block, but this will not be enough to get him Re-Elected. In the 2012 Election we have to replace him with a Conservative Constitution minded President and Take back the Senate and more seats in the House to Repeal and overturn the wreckage he has wrought on our Republic.

    11. Roy Nelson League Ci says:

      We need some strong conservative attorneys or Attorneys General to step up on behalf of Congress and we the people and defend the DOMA. Pro bono.

    12. toledofan says:

      If it's not one thing it's another, but I guess with this administration nothing should surprize any one. The assult on our core values and freedom has been almost non stop since Obama was elected and until he is out, not much will change. It's really amazing to me, with all the mis-steps, mistakes, miscalculations and just out right failures of this administraion, that there are still more than 40% of the people who think this guy and his administration are doing a good job, go figure.

    13. Shelley, Texas says:

      I have contacted my Congressman asking that he and his colleagues take this up in Congress. I trust Heritage will be on Speaker Boehner to not let this issue go.

      Everyday there is another assault by this Administration. Thank you Heritage for your oversight.

    14. Susan, Michigan says:

      Is it time yet to start Impeachment proceedings? This President thinks he is ABOVE the law….first the drilling moratorium, then Obamacare, now DOMA. He needs to step down.

    15. Cecelia Peeples says:

      I am so overwhelmed by the ineptness, the audacity, the disfunction, the lack of morality, the willingness to lie, to cover over, to bring down America on so many fronts. The numbers of my representatives, as well as that of the White House, are programmed into my cell phone and I use them regularly. Is anyone listening? I hope and pray for a turnaround in the Senate and the Presidency in 2012 so that somehow this nation can get back on track. Will the Republicans be willing and able to do what is necessary? Again, I hope and pray.

    16. West Texan says:

      I was privileged to attended a town hall hosted by our freshman congressman, republican. As an independent voter, I found his presentation informative and reassuring. The only opinionated person who made a scene in protest to a recent vote by the congressman was a young lady from the local press.

      Although I did stand and speak on the same matter, my message was broader. That is, ALL domestic affairs need to be returned to the states which is rightfully their sovereign domain. What I didn't say is how this would resolve our country's debt.

      As far as marriage, I agree with your statement that DOMA protects " … the right of each state not to be forced to accept the redefinition of marriage … as a result of state court decisions or laws." Any law that limits social progressives at the national level excels a constitutional test.

    17. Paul, San Diego says:

      No one wishes to cast people that support traditional marriage as bigots. What people do want is for people that constantly try to deny gays and lesbians equal access to the laws of our country to stop. It's unconstitutional. Our country does not allow for laws to exclude groups of people based on prejudices, fear, or moral disapproval.

    18. Jerry Vaughan, St. L says:

      The President has finally taken the right stand on this issue. There is no room for discrimination in our society, even if a perpetually misinformed populace continues to promote it. Obama took an oath to protect the constitution, and the denial of rights freely enjoyed by the majority is flatly unconstitutional. The talk of hetero marriage being a pillar of society that must be protected from gays is a red herring designed to condone bigotry, plain and simple.

    19. Mary McGrath says:

      I think we have other, more pressing problems than DOMA!

      Once we end domestic violence, incest (predominently a heterosexual crime), sexual assault and other crimes, along with poverty, hunger, and war……I'll start worrying about marriage between two consenting adults….and other human rights.

      Wake up and smell the coffee folks! We're in a financial crisis! We were so close to a financial collapse in 2008….and we will still be, unless we get to work on a realistic budget.

    20. Al, Connecticut says:

      Very well written. Thank you for the explaination of DOMA and the events of 2/24/2011. This is a travesty of justice for married couples (the traditional kind – with a husband and wife), families, and children. I hope the silver lining works!

    21. ROY S. MALLMANN II says:

      This Anti-American President Obama is not even eligible to be president as noted in his own words as his father was not an American Citizen and in fact was a British Citizen. Also, Mr. Obama had Indonesian citizenship when he was a youth which has been proven as he applied for a recieved a Fulbright Scholarship for foreign students when he attended Occidental College in California. Both events make him ineligble. He has refused to enforce the immigration law, the voter rights law (as it applies to minorities) and now he refuses to follow the Defense of Marriage act. He has violated law after law and the Supreme Court does nothing. He needs to be impeached. How much longer must this continue?

    22. Chris, Long Beach says:

      It's 2011. Some people are homosexual and in love. Get over it. BTW, if you truly respect the first amendment, you wouldn't sift through comments and censor them at all. Walk the walk.

    23. LibertyAtStake, Alex says:

      "Congress needs to act to make sure DOMA has effective and aggressive defense in court."

      That works, for now. But lets' also add this latest outrage to the growing evidence file … impeachment on grounds of contempt for the constitution BHO swore an oath to preserve, protect, and defend.

      d(^_^)b
      http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com
      "Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive"

    24. KC - New Mexico says:

      OMG – you don't suppose that some governmental union leaders might be gay! Afterall, the president is in bed with the unions so he might as well be in bed with the gays. Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) should not be changed! Way to go Washington leaders – just another example of how out of touch you are with the mainstream American! God help us all!

    25. tim, Philadephia says:

      how wrong you are on sooooo many levels….no matter that a vast majority of congress passed this blatent UNCONSTITUTIONAL law 17 years ago..it was unconstitutional then, and it is now. You cant talk your way around this fact! We must stand up as Americans and defend equality, liberty and freedoms for EVERY American..you cant deny 1,100 rights to a long discriminated against minorty…This is just ANOTHER victory for Obama..he will be on the right side of history…when all is said and done..and you will be on the wrong side.

      Sincerely

      Tim

    26. Anastasia, Michigan says:

      Obama is insane. The fifth Amendment has nothing to do with the Defense of Marriage Act. The fifth Amendment is talking about crime and those involved with the crime. While I support some kind of same-sex marriage I do not support twisting the meaning of our Amendments.

    27. Bette, NJ says:

      I M P E A C H !

    28. Hank G. Prescott, AZ says:

      When a president refuses to do the duty to which he swore an oath (enforce the law – not interpret it), maybe it is time for the Congress to assert it's Constitutional balance here and begin impeachment proceedings.

    29. Steve, Arizona says:

      Last time I checked, the Constitution is also "good law" in the United States. Inasmuch as it is the DOJ's duty and obligation to enforce the laws of the United States, it seems to me that it would be perfectly appropriate for the DOJ to consider the Constitution, along with all other laws, when considering how to argue matters in court. Lawyers have ethical duties, which prevent them from asserting positions that they believe to be baseless. After extensive research, they believe — as do I — that DOMA plainly violates the equal protection aspects of the Constitution and, therefore, has no merit as a matter of law. Because they are ethically and legally prohibited from asserting positions for which there is no legal basis, I believe the administration and the DOJ have done exactly the right thing.

    30. tim, Philadephia PA says:

      John..how wrong you are! DOMA was simply unconstitutional when It was passed by congress..and its unconstitutional now. There is no way getting around that simple fact…You cant leave out gays from 1100 rights that heteros get through marriage. YOUR god cannot define MY life…who I chose to enter into a marriage contract with…as a hard working, tax paying, American citizens who has never broken the law. Funny that a serial killer can murder 17 woman..and still get married in jail..but I cant marry my partner of 10 years..oh want…thats NOT funny..its tragic and can and will change.

      Tim

    31. Lee, Kansas says:

      Critical thinking, common sense Americans, by any measure, clearly see that Obama's presidency is a colossal failure. Although Obama is not stupid, he is without question a fool making one foolish decision after another. We can only hope the House of Representatives can mitigate the damange he can cause until we can get rid of him in 2012. Left unchecked, he has the potential to severly damage if not destroy our nation. America does not have room for weak, cowardly men or women to lead our country, whether it is as President of the United States, or as a member of Congress.

    32. Luis Miami says:

      You cannot defend the un-defendable.

      All US citizens should have the same rights under the law. DOMA prevents more than 10% of US citizens to enjoy the same rights as the rest of Americans.

      There was a time in which we thought that blacks didn’t deserve to have the same rights as whites. A time when we thought women should NOT have the same rights as men, and a time when we thought marriage should the union between a white man and a white woman.

      Fortunately the views of the American people on these issues have evolved and changed, and we are now a better society for it.

      It is time to recognize that we all have the same right to marry, regardless of our sexual orientation.

    33. Laura Van Overscheld says:

      What is missing from this discourse is the fact that our Founding documents recognized that the culture requires adherence to the "Laws of Nature and Nature's God" (Declaration of Independence, first paragraph). This has been established as a cause for separation from the crown. This is as original to our existence as a Nation as any other tenet. I submit that we have an obligation to our Founders, just as they committed to us by the founding of this great country. Remember they pledged their lives,their treasure, their sacred honor.

      Whether the Obama Administration would like to renounce this by its insult to the cultural norm is irrelevant. Marriage as defined as 'one man and one woman' and its safeguards for raising children limited it to the societal institution have long been observed to serve us well over more than two centuries. So much so that it is Federal Law, since the Clinton Administration. Has life and culture changed so much in the few years since that it is no longer useful? The Administration's whim of dislike of DOMA is not acceptable to the American culture, nor I venture to say to most Americans.

      Mr. Obama does not hold the title of Supreme Judge of our Laws (the Constitution prohibits it) nor can he be elected to be such. Therefore, his pronouncement of the rejection to the DOMA and calling it to be unconstitutional by way of the Fifth Amendment is ill placed, if not downright incoherent. Though educated as a barrister, Mr Obama is not an attorney. He is a 'has been' lawyer. He is not a legal expert by any measure recognized at this point and time; he has not practiced in years and he obviously hates it, the law! And he shows his lack of respect for the law just about every time he mentions it. He says the Constitution is obviously flawed and then in this context he references it? A clear sign of the demagogue who wishes to obfuscate everything we have learned in the past. This is pure Alinsky. Folks, wake up and decide you embrace this trash or you reject it.

      Did the law develop out of the Laws of Nature that was observed by humans through millenia? So some pipsqueak comes along and says this time-honored observation is no longer valid nor useful?

    34. Doug Whaley, Lake Ha says:

      Obama's actions on DOMA and the federal judges decision that Obamacare is not constitutional show that the U.S. government doesn't work anymore. This is the biggest power grab since Lincoln during the civil war. Weak leadership by Republicans pretty much means nothing will be done about it. For all intents and purposes Obama has complete control over all three branches of government.

    35. Roger TN says:

      The President has found means to circumvent the Congress with agency/Czar regulations, now he has found a way to circumvent the Judiciary. Can you say dictatorship? Why can't most liberals and Democrats see that our country is being taken down the drain. Our nation looks like Greece and the Middle East wsith the riots, tacitly supported by the administration. The State Department doesn't seem to have a clue and the CIA is AWOL.

    36. Lou Kertesz says:

      I was taught and always believed that it was the constitutional responsibility of the Executive Branch of Government to "enforce" the law.

      If that is still true, then I believe that President Obama is in clear violation of his constitutional responsibility and his oath of office in taking this action.

      What do you think?

      Lou K

    37. Patricia Fochs says:

      Question: President Clintol signed the Bill for determination that Marriage is Between a Man and a Woman. How is it possible for King Obama to make decisions that should be made in the Congress?

    38. Ben C. Ann Arbor, MI says:

      The family unit is the cornerstone of civilization. It is the ultimate saftey net. No matter how much of our money government spends it simply cannot match the function of the family unit. If/when government is successful in destroying our cornerstone we will be a lost civilization. And it is our children and grandchildren that will suffer.

    39. A "Classical Li says:

      The executive branch's unilateral declaration that a particular duly passed law is unconstitution and will not be defended by the justice department is a problem much larger than any one issue affected. By disregarding our nation's brilliant doctrine of spearation of powers, this admninistration is striking a foundational blow against real democracy, the rule-of-law, and due process. The doctrine of separation of powers stands between the American people and the rise a dfictator. Under our doctrine of separation of powers, it is for the courts to determine the constitutionality of our nations laws, not the president or his minions. The administration's recent steps to assume the power of unilaterally determining constitutionaliy of laws is nothing less than a step toward the sort of totalitarian control usually coveted by the left's must extreme elements. It goes a long way toward explaining this administration's recent reluctance to acknowledge the authority of U.S. courts to rule portions of Obama Care unconstitional and unenforceable in its entirety. If the president can pick and choose which laws he will obey or defend (yes to enforcement of Obamacare, no to enforcement of immigration law, no to defense of marriage act), and if the president can pick and choose to whom the law will apply (witnesss special waivers under Obmacare for union interest and selected big business, failure of Obama's justice department to prosecute the Black Panthers for voter intimidation violations, revoking of water-rights previously granted without cause, etcetera) then we can no longer can claim to have a representational democracey in the United States of America.

      Rampant disregard for democracy while claiming to be its biggest defenders and representatives seems wide-spread these days – even if the logic is confused and nonsensical. Consider union organized protests in Wisconsin. How this elitiest and most extortionist of special interest groups can claim to represent the will of the "people" is laughable when their every action has been designed to derail the actual democratic process in favor of preserving self-serving union financial interests (the new greed) and power. They need to be reminded that we live in a democracy and that in a real democracy, elections have consequences. Or, they are perhaps not so much about deocracy as they claim. Perhaps this explains their recent solidarity with such global groups as the Muslim Brotherhood. Is it their love of democracy that brings them together? Or their hunger for power? Hmmmm. I don't think that burka is going to come with voting rights….. Since when do chatel vote?

    40. Tom Berquist, Pennsy says:

      Obamas actions go way beyond his latest action of ignoring the law of the land on the DOMA passed in 1996. This administration ignores the courts, courts and majority of Americans on many issues. This is clearly dictatorial action on the part of this administration and should be treated as such.

    41. Chuck Anziulewicz says:

      If part of the President's job is upholding the Constitution, then he has made the correct decision here. There was never any point in defending something as clearly unconstitutional as the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act." DOMA sets up differing legal standards for Gay and Straight couples. Because of DOMA, even Gay couples who are legally married in Iowa or Massachusetts are unrecognized by the federal government for the purposes of tax law and Social Security; obviously this violates the 14th Amendment. Also, unlike married Straight couples, married Gay couples become "UN-married" if they move across state lines, so DOMA violates the "Full Faith & Credit" clause. Face it: There's no constitutional justification for denying law-abiding, taxpaying Gay couples the exact same legal benefits that Straight couples have always taken for granted.

    42. jBen Lloyd says:

      When two men are married to each other and can make babies and when two women are married to each other and can make babies, then I will consider changing my mind relative to marriage. Until then marriage has been and should stay between a man and woman as in my opinion God intended it to be !!!! Those who want to change the law relative to this should be removed from office !!!

    43. Phil, Pearland, Texa says:

      So the President of the United States has determined that a bill that was lawfully passed by both the House and Senate, and then signed into law by President Clinton is unconstitutional. What happened to the Supreme Court? Aren't they the branch of government charged with that task? It's not up to someone in the White House or the DOJ or the Congress, but the Supreme Court. How does this President get off with telling the DOJ that a law is unconstitutional. I wonder what law he will pick next as being unconstitutional. I am waiting for someone in the Republican or for that matter the Democratic Party to stand up and say this is not right, but unfortunately the silence is deafening. The law itself might be a minor (?) issue in the grand scheme of things, but does this concept of the President deciding which laws of this country to enforce based on his own whim or political leaning concern you? It certainly does me.

    44. Brian, Michigan says:

      This is a very dangerous precedent that threatens each of us directly as well as the civil liberties we hold so dear.

      We must demand Congress recognize the danger of arbitrary enforcement and take action. Demand response from their offices on this issue……

      I have sent the following message to each of my Senators and District Congressman:

      I am concerned with the Administrations de facto decision to "not" enforce the DoMA. How is this possible? This is a statute introduced in Congress, passed by both Houses, and signed by a sitting President. I am concerned with the precedent this creates. How can I as a citizen be guaranteed the government will not arbitrarily enforce laws to the detriment of my individual civil liberties as guaranteed by the Constitution?

      What course of action does this Congress intend to pursue to ensure the Executive branch will enforce all laws, not just those it finds to be convenient?

    45. elizabeth craver,tex says:

      Marriage is founded between a husband and a wife. God intended marriage to be between a man and woman!! not a woman and a woman or man and a man, god clearly states in the bible that a man shall leave his family and cling to his wife! Now why cant people understand this??????? So please Mr. President you need to fight for what is right and what is wrong!!!!! dont let our children today see that it is ok to be with the same sex cause it is not!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    46. tom chambers says:

      As you can tell ,obama is not a true American ! This is not defined by any peice of paper or document . It is soley defined by his actions and Ideas about what he would like to tear down and destroy in our great country . I was not personaly there but I can read in several writings what our forfathers wanted for us and our children . it was not too be an immoral decadent society that believes that marriage should be any other than man and woman . the human body was designed to concieve children . if man on man or woman on woman could coniceved ,without artificial means than so be it . but as far as I can tell it can not be done . As you may have noticed I have up till now left the bible out of the reasons ,that is because you do not have to believe in the bible to be moral there are alot of reasons to believe in man and woman marriages only . just use comman sense. and logic . [look it up ] no body seems to know what that means anymore

    47. Judith in Michigan says:

      The debate should be more than just about DOMA. The current administration has fine-tuned a habit of picking and choosing which laws it wishes to follow and those it wants to ignore.

      It also has decided to "make new law", not by national debates and votes in Congress, but by fiat, by regulation, by un-elected czars and by executive order. (Kinda sounds like Venezuela, doesn't it?) This is extremely dangerous to our Constitutional Republic and must not be allowed to continue.

      What we are witnessing is The United States of America being forced to commit

      suicide. I would bet that a lot of citizens who voted for this administration are a little uneasy now. This can't be the hope and change they thought they would be getting.

      DOMA is just one cog in this wheel to America's dismanteling.

    48. Siegfried Herrnreite says:

      This is only one example of Obama's thumbing his nose at other branches of government, and the people, which adds to countless items of failures on his slate which may not only make him a one-term president, but may, in the end, not even allow him to complete his one term, facing expulsion by impeachment.

      Yet, he can still point at his record and gloat that he caused serious financial damage by government's interference in our free market system, causing a large segment of U. S. citizens to suffer, exposing our national security and tarnishing our image in the world all over, as no one before him.

    49. Bruce, NJ says:

      I hope that clear thinking Americans of all political views realize what this President has done to our country in the short time he has been in office. He continues to dishonestly push personal policies and programs that are not supported by the vast majority of the people he swore to serve. The media continues to portray Obama as a person who is only following his convictions, which cannot be further from the truth. I think he is fundamentally dishonest and a charlatan. In fact I am beginning to see President Nixon and some of his dirty tricks in a whole new light. He had nothing on this current President.

      Regardless of what your personal thoughts on DOMA might be, the fact that any one elected official, person or party can circumvent any law and the Constitution of this great country must bring pause to every citizen of this great nation. Our future cannot depend on any one individual’s personal political views governing this land and it’s people without their consent.

    50. Jim Delaney says:

      His sudden resistance to DOMA is a classic Obama deversion. He's blowing it big time on the economy, energy and foreign affairs. This guy is a MENACE and if he keeps bucking the will of the people and the laws of the land, his next stop will be impeachment. And, frankly, it can't come soon enough!!!!!!!!!

    51. john gunter says:

      Is anyone shocked that the POTUS decides what is and isn't constitutional, even if an overwhelming vote in congress set forth the law?

      The arrogance and political pandering of this phony is overwhelming.

    52. Joan Baumgart Manito says:

      I wanted you to know how much I look forward to the Morning Bell each day. I just retired and now how more time to follow the political scene – Thank you so much for your informative updates. You provide a great service to Americans. Please keep up the good work!

      Joan Baumgart

    53. Ken Jarvis - Las Veg says:

      If Murdoch wanted the USA economy to rebound

      he would post GOOD NEWS on Page ONE of the WSJ.

      He doesn't.

      Today's Good news = "GM Rebounds with BEST year since 1999."

      He puts THAT in B section.

    54. Gee, NY says:

      Oboma is only following the logic presented in TIME mag. 11/29/10 Who Needs Marriage? Which basicly stated that We married couples of men and women are the perverts today.

    55. Sandra, San Antonio says:

      Guess I just don't understand how the President and the Attorney General can decide which laws will be upheld and which laws won't be upheld. Just doesn't seem right.

    56. Leon Lundquist, Dura says:

      This is just the latest example of how the Obama Administration is running down the Rule Of Law. Clear to me these Demo-crats have no respect for Representative Government! Amazing that Obama used his Constitutional Law education to subvert Constitutional Law in clever and duplicitous ways. We have the Justice Department doing whatever they want, from a Political stance (Progressive Socialist, even Communist stance) and that is subverting the Law at the level of definition. Unthinkable in years past, that Senators would leave the State of Wisconsin so as to prevent a Vote in the Chamber. That is nothing short of subverting the Rule of Law. It subverts the very idea of Representative Government! It attacks the Constitutional Form of the Government!

      I think Republican Governors should charge those missing Senators with Constitutional High Crimes! The Constitution commands that they Represent, so willfully failing to Represent is undercutting our Constitutional Representative Democracy. It is a crime. It is a crime against their constituents. Ask me, it is a crime in progress for the Unions to destroy their State economies by dirty payoffs by Democrats in times past! These were not Collective Bargaining agreements, these were payoffs! These are the very essence of political corruption, so Hell no! Don't let the Public Employee Unions bargain any more! Now, go beyond that, prosecute these 'bargains' as the Crimes they are!

      It cannot be lawful for a small segment of society to destroy the State! I don't care how they do it! It is unlawful for these corrupt Unions to harm the general public, indeed enslave them! There is nothing to it but graft! So now has it come to this? Graft and Corruption is legal? I don't care if Obama says so! He is un-American and deadly wrong about this!

    57. Dr. Henry D. Sinopol says:

      Members of Congress, Republican & Democrat will remain silent. Re-election is much more important that the rule of law. The gay & lesbian vote is solitified and focused.

      Heritage, when will you understand that by continuing to support the lifers in Congress, Republican & Democrat – you will continue to get the same results.

    58. valerie, kona says:

      I know you guys are pretty smart, smarter than me when it comes to the Constitution, but isn't the equal protection clause part of the 14th Amendment not the Fifth? Or am I up too early?

    59. OneOfTheBunch says:

      The mind-set of this president continues to baffle most level-headed family-oriented Americans. According to D'Souza's book – Obama's Rage – his goal is to damage or destroy many of the things we regard as sacred, the family being one of them. Many who voted against him saw that from the beginning. Now we can see it more clearly. Whatever we do, let's stay on the doorsteps of our representatives and encourage them to bar the door to prevent the advancement of his arrogant agenda.

    60. Nancy Sc says:

      Why do gay people have to "marry", why can't they be happy with civil unions? They would have every advantage a married person has, in legal matters, why destroy the sanctity of marriage? When will our president stand up and act like a president? Liberals want us to pay for killing babies, throw out marriage is a man and a woman, not same sexes, Thank God they are not able to clone themselves. This country has enough problems without taking on marriage between same sexes, wake up America, get the budget in order, stop spending money the next 5 generations will have to pay back. Obama get your act together.

    61. Robert VA says:

      When you can't focus on jobs, budget…. change the subject.

    62. ThomNJ says:

      Don't forget that obama knows what he is doing – why do you think he won't put the birth cert issue to rest – just like with DOMA – it is relatively easy for him to make changes that outrage us and damage our country – BUT for us to recapture the original position, it takes a lot of time, effort and money – he and his cronies KNOW that, and they are counting on us to be spread thin fighting fires everywhere. That is precisely what he wants, because he also knows along the way that there will be at least some issues that will be argued over amongst even the like-minded folks as to what is important, etc. I can run by a bunch of machines and toss a wrench into each one as I go by in a matter of minutes, but to fix the damage done for each would take exceptionally longer.

      He is sowing seeds of revolution, of anarchy of disruption – call it what you want, but it is also knwn as a form of divide and conquer.

    63. F.D. O'Toole, N says:

      The President is a pretty smart guy. North Africa is in turmoil and he has no idea what to do. The dollar is about to crash due to his guy running the printing presses night and day. Gas is going through the roof, as is food.

      But it's "No worries" time at the White House. What to do? Throw some red meat to his lefty supporters. Outrage the Religious Right. Take a hard shot at the Constitution in refusing to enforce laws he doesn't like. Defund the military.

      From his view…smart politics!

      Then again, he told us he would bring change that would put us outside our comfort zone.

    64. Bobbie says:

      It's all about tolerance and discipline of one word. Why gays can't accept a word of their own fighting for the word marriage, just tells me they want to dilute the true definition to accompany their selfishness and force acceptance. Marriage is an institute that defines the union of one of each gender. Homosexuality does not apply.

    65. frank keen says:

      Marriage should be and stay between a man and woman only, STOP!!! Calling Us All Bigiots Just because we don't defend and believe in your peverted life style, if anything you gay and lesibeans are the true bigiots, you have such a hate against GOD the mere mention of his name sets you off into a childish fit of temper like a little spoiled child. We are Not racist either, we have nothing against afro americans getting married to whites,…and lastly……it is our bussiness, cause if DOMA is repealed, the next step will be to push your gay sex classes into all our schools,starting at fourth grade, and then the gays will want permits to have their sick gay parade,.in all our cities…….NO Way…..Leave our Children alone Leave Our Schools Alone,……Civil Unions .Yes..with all the same benifits of marriage……Gay Marriage NO ………and dirty scum hollywood keep your Damm dirty stinking nose out of Relegion,..It's None of Your Bussiness How We raise Our Children….Hollywood morals are the morals of Scum !!!!!!!!

    66. West Texan says:

      Both sides make good arguments about what best defines a marriage. What bothers me is the accusation that states who choose to recognize only traditional heterosexual unions are maliciously discriminatory. Wrong! We're not talking about Jim Crow laws biased race, creed, religion, ect…. We're talking about how society chooses to recognize the structure of marriage. Nothing discriminatory about that.

    67. Nancy, Georgia says:

      I'm amazed at how many comments this article received! My thoughts: I don't care if gays have a civil unoin. I would like to know why they insist it be called "marriage"? Why? I think the reason is, b/c if they have federally mandated "rights" to marry, they can go in and try to shut churches up in preaching against homosexuality. Why do they care? Churches preach against all kinds of stuff I wish they wouldn't but as they have no power over me, it doesn't matter! I can't figure it.

    68. Lil, San Diego says:

      I think this is just one more indication of the hatred this man has for this country. Consistently, people "like" him yet they don't "approve" of his policies; however, his policies are destroying this nation.

      Yes, the debt is the crushing monster that must be mastered and eliminated; but, this man, Obama, has done everything to undermine this country: its values, traditions, and exceptionalism. I believe he must be confronted at each and every opportunity in order to countermand his mad march toward destruction.

    69. Gabriel says:

      John Gunter writes,

      "Is anyone shocked that the POTUS decides what is and isn’t constitutional, even if an overwhelming vote in congress set forth the law?"

      -but conservatives can decide if HR3200 is or isn't constitutional right?

      wow. HYPOCRITS!!!!!!!!!!!

    70. Ben C. Ann Arbor, MI says:

      Yes Ken, GM has had a good year until you factor in the bailout money. When will GM pay us back? Seems to me loans should be paid back before bonuses. are issued.

      The checks and balances with unions in industry is that if employees are paid too much and the company is not profitable the company folds. In government the checks and balances arise in the ballot box. Your myoptic notion of "joining a union to make more money" seems valid, until you anger your employer (the voter) and we defund your position. Or, you can move to Europe and enjoy Eurosocialism.

    71. Andrew Jamieson says:

      It seems to me that by refusing to enforce an act of law, Mr. Obama is practicing "nullification"(a practice used by individual States to determine the constitutioality of laws and whether these laws should be adhered to). If that is the case is this not an act of treason for the Federal government to "nullify" it's own federal laws without going through the proper procedures I.e. The supreme court?

    72. Common Sense says:

      If same sex marraige is recognized, what follows??? Sibling marraige? Three way? Pets? Children? Group? Temporary, for selected time period? Certainly many of the same arguements could be made for some of these???

    73. Dinah Garrison Fairb says:

      DOMA is not an issue on which I have strong opinions. I do, however, have strong feelings about a President who thinks he is all 3 branches of our government. The law was passed by Congress. Its Constitutionality should be decided by the Judicial branch. The President's job in this is to see that DOJ sees that the laws are obeyed. How can we have gone so far wrong so fast? It isn't as though this is the first episode of this from our Administration. Remember the New Black Panther case? I am scared for our country.

    74. Dinah Garrison Fairb says:

      I just had another thought about this. When I read the comments above I noticed that opinions were all over the place about DOMA. Nearly all comments were courteous, but contained strong feelings about the law itself. This is a wonderful way for Obama and his crew to drive a wedge into the Republican block. I had anticipated it would be abortion, but maybe that is still coming. To defeat Obama in 2012 we will all have to stand together. That is an absolute. The Dems will make every effort to divide us and on the issues of gays and abortions they know they have "handles" to get hold of our weaknesses. By weaknesses I just mean things about which we don't stand totally, solidly together as we do with the debt and so on. Let's be cautious how we proceed.

    75. Wayne, Louisiana says:

      The law is not something that should be selectively enforced. If you disagree with an administration, you risk being found in violation of a law. This is absurd. Marriage should be between a man and woman. Any other civil unions should be defined in a manner that is acceptable to the States.

    76. Dave W. Provo. UT says:

      Last time I checked the Constitution it said there were 3 branches of government, each with its distinct powers and duties, First we had courts creating laws now we have a President deciding which laws are constitutional without even going before a court. Do I hear groans from Franklin, Adams and Jefferson? As my grandaddy used to say, If you elect a smart fool you get a donkey that kicks you with all four feet.

    77. Patrick, Canton, MI says:

      Like it or not, President Obama is probably within his legal rights in refusing to defend DOMA if he truly believes it is unconstitutional. He took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution which is the supreme law of the land, superior to any law enacted by Congress. If only because of separation of powers, no court is going to order him to defend DOMA. But courts can declare DOMA legal and leave Obama and other Administration officials no excuse for not implementing it. And courts can order federal officials (including the President) to implement DOMA even if they won't defend it in the courts.

      That's what conservatives should really be seeking. While Obama (and legislators) may not be (easily) legally accountable to the courts, they ARE accountable to the electorate at the ballot box.

    78. John, Colorado says:

      President Bush should have denied police power to the courts for several rulings in different parts of the country, most of those being from the 9th circuit court.

      Jim Talent could have won his Senate race if he had used the marriage and partial birth abortion issues like they deserved to be used. 79% of Missourians were opposed to homosexual marriage.

      If the RNC weren't a bunch of cowardly half-liberal pansies at the top, they could frickasee the Democrats in any election.

    79. C.L. Zapotocky says:

      There are MOUNTAINS of research proof that marriage is measurably beneficial to a stable, peaceful, healthy society……children are far more stable and healthy with two parents in an intact family structure…..stable, peaceful, healthy communities are built on families who treasure their children (rather than send them into mine fields as human fodder) and care for them as well as for aging members. Let's get real and get back to recognizing and WORKING AGAINST what makes a society barbaric, unstable, and violent!!! There is no sane argument to support governments at any level undermining and not encouraging the formation of families that value human life at all stages.

    80. Chroma41, California says:

      If marriage, hetero- or homo-sexual, is so important and "the core of our society", why do over fifty percent end up in divorce court?

    81. Lee-White Tanks AZ says:

      Bill Clinton was impeached but the Senate balked at removing him from office.To this day his rehabilitation in our media is a never ending blast of pure noise.

      I realize that this President most probably would, if impeachment procedures were undertaken in the House, given the make up of Congress, He also would not be removed from office, even if successfully impeached.

      I think this would be wasted effort at best and very counterproductive, counter intuitive, and it could backfire on the GOP. We must stay the course of severe cost cutting and in special instances like planned parenthood and Obamacare absolutely unbending adherence to principle. There can be no compromises here.

      Stay focused at all costs. The Administration, the media lackeys, the Reed controlled part of the US Senate and every left wing kook in existence will try to trip you up. The sudden appearance of the DOMA issue (aka Red Herring) is a classic example of political Three Card Monty by The Bama and crew. (Alinsky lives on in the hearts of Obama and his minions) Don't lose focus.

      As an aside, the Department of Education should now be visible to any but the intentionally self blind for what it is. A home for pro unionists and pointy headed academics that are more interested in their own benefits and power than anything that has to do with the education of the nation's children. Defunding of the DoEd would send a clear message. Federal support of the national teachers union movement has ended here and now. Experimentation in the dozens of ridiculous "educational" programs dreamed up by people who have never taught needs also to end here and now.

      Parents and "real" educators better step up, this train will only go past this one time with a better than average chance of reaching the home station, halt the DoEd here and now.

      I sincerely hope our Federal, and local GOP, Tea Partys, and Conservatives understand that the "die" has been cast. There can not be any backsliding or turning back. The very existence of the US as we know it is "on the tabe" so to speak.

      Go WI, Go IN, Go OH, Go NJ et al.

    82. Al from Fl says:

      The more I watch these things, the more convinced I am that the democrat party (and Pres Obama in particular) have left the American vision of what society should be and what is the best way to govern. This chicago style "boss" like approach where special interest deals become the mode for goverance is disgusting. Abortion on demand, same sex marriage, unions demanding more even if the state is in a deficit condition, picking and choosing who gets what, who will be thrown under the bus etc. all leads to chaos. Our Founding Fathers warned us of deficit spending and of the need for an informed and religious people if this constitutional republic is to endure.

      As for unions, as some have commented here, I have also come to the conclusion that a public union is a conflict of interest and should be banned. Has anyone noticed that every issue that is handled by the government becomes hopelessly bogged down in politics and can no longer be dealt with for a solution that is in the best interests of the people. How can the very legislators that are dependent upon election funding from the unions negotiate with that same union as a representative of the people – the taxpayers? You want to be in a union, join the private sector and negotiate to your heart's content.

    83. Lee-White Tanks AZ says:

      Jill-Maine 9:55am You raise a very good point.

      Your question: "If Homosexuals get the right to marry it won’t end there. Next in line are poligamists and I only wonder whose next after that. I am not a bigot but I strongly believe marriage should not be redefined".

      One major part of answer to this lies with Islam and Sharia Law. Marriage, and the "position" of the female in the marital arrangement bears little or no resemblance to Judeo-Christian Law and marriage. Ours is a "partnership" to raise a family while theirs is a Patriarchy literally with life and death male dominance over the "family"

      The sudden appearance of potential Muslim influence on our laws, including marriage is definitely worthy of note. Their practice of polygamy as well as "close" family member marriages should raise alarms as they continue their world wide Caliphate movement.

    84. Daisysue says:

      Getting the National Budget Under Control is extremely important. I believe our congress is able to Multi-Task and focus on more than one issue at time, However what Congress CAN NOT DO is ignore the DOMA ISSUE.
      Since OBAMA again shows his DISTAIN for our Constitutional Laws and shirks his duty as Americas Leader. Congress must show their Co-Equal Position in Government and address this at an in house meeting, and also demonstrate to the American People their Respect and Determination to uphold our Congressional Laws. IMO, Domestic Issues need to be returned to the states, which is rightfully their sovereign domain.

    85. Robert McAvoy, Burle says:

      Families are the most fundamental unit in society. As such, families are the primary means by which the culture is transmitted from one generation to the next. Most of the problems we have today are traceable to the diminished state of our families. To further denigrate the family by allowing a misinformed group to demand that we abandon traditional marriage as the norm is narcissistic in the extreme. When did humankind's evolution come to be defined as non-normative?

    86. Terry Herring, St. P says:

      Once, again, Obama shows his true colors: his contempt for civil society and the rule of law.

      Without the bedrock foundation of the lifetime union of one man and one woman, as prescribed by God, Almighty, civil society will cease to exist. In every instance where progressives, statists, totatilarians, or by any other name those who would seek to destroy society are called, the destruction of the family is a critical element in the process. The homosexual agenda is based upon this, as well as the anti-american forces to which Obama is beholden.

      As the Chief Executive of the United States, Obama swore to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the land. through his action in this particular instance, his refusal to defend a legitimately established law because he considers unconstitutional is pure defiance of a co-equal branch of government. he is putting himself aboive the law.

      The appropriate remedy for this is impeachment and trial in the Senate. I believe, firmly, that the time has come to remove this person from the office if President before he further subverts the Constitution nad the security of the United States and its citizens.

    87. Anthony, Minneapolis says:

      Obama's oath is to "preserve, protect, and defend the CONSTITUTION of the United States," which includes the 14th Amendment – equal protection under the law. To say that DOMA does not create a "separate but equal" state is a flat out lie – as the entire foundation of the law is bigotry, inequality, and intolerance based on religious ideas. As American Christians, you have the right to believe gays and lesbians shouldn't be able to marry – it's in the 1st Amendment. However, you do not have the right to create a separate but equal system, or to establish your religion into our country's laws.

      Besides, what do you mean by "God" anyway? A grumpy old man who toys with human lives and whose most active pastime is genocide, and who viciously had his own son slaughtered to "take away the sins of the world" which he could have done without batting a cosmic eyelash (that is, if he is omnipotent and omniscient)? Maybe instead of obsessing over dogma and his death, Christians should examine the message that Jesus gave when he was alive – love thy neighbor, blessed are the peacemakers, etc…

      Just a thought, but I do think that if Jesus were alive today, he would find all of this petty squabbling over allowing someone to receive the same rights as others to be infantile and lacking any kind of true Christian virtue. But then again, I would probably be considered an apostate.

    88. Franklin Stevenson, says:

      There persists this failure in the debate about marriage to understand and assert effectively that the question is not one of rights. The state has not established marriage as a status to which people have a right; it is a status or standing the state confers because of a compelling state interest to promote the union of one man and one woman as the preferred context for children to be raised up in society. This simple reality has been commonplace across the face of humanity for eons. Children are raised up in other contexts and circumstances with reasonable success, and the context of one man and one woman in marriage does not guarantee a desired outcome either, but the "traditional marriage" context has been universally recognized as the preferred context to which civil government has chosen to give its privileged status. The recent clamoring for the recognition of "same sex marriage" as a right which is unconstitutional to deny those desiring it rests on this erroneous styling of marriage as a right. The efforts to cite the ruling of the Supreme Court that overturned laws against interracial marriage as precedent are spurious, as there was no challenge to the understanding of marriage as between one man and one woman in that case. If we accede to the styling of the question as one of personal rights, then the defense of marriage as being between one man and one woman cannot be sustained successfully and the societal reverberations are disturbing consequent to that loss. For if marriage is a "constitutional right" of individuals in any alternate combination to that of one woman and one man, then there is no bar to the claim for such status and the attendant privileges under law. More concretely, there would be no sustainable bar to polygamy, group marriage, and who knows what else (a man and his goat, a woman and her horse?), with unimaginable consequences of complication for laws and relationships.

      There obviously is a will of the people still behind the protection of the "traditional marriage" view, with an overwhelming passage of the Federal DOMA (342-67 in the House and 85-14 in the Senate), 37 states with their own DOMA, and 30 states (including even California) with constitutional amendments to establish marriage as being between one man and one woman. As this conflict comes to a head under the current Administration's obdurate and arrogant disregard for this will of the people, we cannot succeed without clearly taking charge of the ground of this debate, and turning this discussion clearly away from speaking of marriage as a right.

    89. Joe Collins, Bremert says:

      This is a no brainer………….Marriage is between a man and a woman….end of conversation………God created the heavens and the earth and established man and woman,, clearly stated that marriage is between a man and a woman.. Any and all that argue that point, is arguing with God himself… and guess who will always come out the winner……………..America,, the people and the politicians must grow up and stand up for what they know is the truth.. otherwise you can write America off just like all the other great nation that fell before us…

      There is no room for what we have today..that is politically correct wisdom,, the truth will set you free and the truth will make you strong.. This does not mean, bye any stretch of the imagination that there is room for judging others. This does mean we need to stand for what is right and true when we establish our laws and they are clearly set forth in the ten commandents….If people choose to live in sin,, that is there choice,, but this does not mean we write laws endorsing their choice.. The matter is between God and each one of us as a individual,, we answer to God and no one else….Return our nation to a nation of God…with every individual free to choose their way of life…..just as our founding fathers established for us all….""Marriage is between a man and a woman" period….and that also means no civil unions,,,if someone choose to live in a relationship man and man or woman and woman that is their chose and free to do so,, but do not ask for a endorsement of any nature from the state or the union…or the people…

    90. 2dokie says:

      All of this admin's actions havebeen to spread chaos & confusion. The Dems used to do this to have something to pretend to fix. The Pres's actions though are of sufficient scale to do permanent damage. It's surely past time to start impeachment proceedings. We should soon see who the men of good will and true metal are. Unfortunatelynot enough Tea Party candidates were elected in the last election, but I'm confident 2012 will CHANGE that problem. If the present crop of politicians don't aspire to rise to the occasion "We the people" can find some that will. It's past time to put the lie to all the half-witted post-modern relativism. Pot-culture based foreign &security policies don't work.

    91. Yellowbird says:

      What can you say, obama has the mentality of a "chicago" community organizer and beyond that, absolutely nothing, but a silver tongue.

    92. Gary47290, Berkeley says:

      You're wrong. VOters are not unanimous on your position.

      The voters of Arizona rejected an anti-Gay marriage amendment in 2006. It took a second try with a kinder gentler hate to get it past the voters in 2008.

      The voters in Connecticut reject a call for a ConCon in 2008, even though the "Family" Values people explicitly called for a yes vote so they could amend marriage equality out of Connecticut law.

      Voters in Massachusetts have has 4 chances to change their legislature, and the pro-equality side has increased their headcount.

      California barely passed prop 8 in 2008, losing 9% support from 2000.

      In 2010, Rhode Island and New York elected new governors who specifically included marriage equality in their platform.

      The future is clear: America will extend marriage equality because the voters will reject the anti-fairness perspective behind these amendments in the future, and begin to repeal the amendments starting next year.

    93. Elimelech, San Anton says:

      When (not if) I marry my husband, it will not weaken your marriage, much less our society. Your argument for defense of marriage is supported only by the idea that all heterosexual couples reproduce… which is not true by any means. Some people don't want kids, some are too old, some are infertile, some just want to adopt children.

      As far as religion goes, you can keep your narrow-minded ideals of G-d to yourself. My G-d is a loving one, one whom I love and respect with all of my heart, and one that loves all of His creations equally.

      Ask Jesus if tradition or love is more important. We won't know until we meet Him in person, but until then, I'm going to do as He said and love with all my heart and enter into a commitment with the man I love.

    94. Mike, North Carolina says:

      Will somebody please point out some things?

      First: What does the 5th Amendment have to do with DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act), as it is written, since Obama appears to use the 5th Amendment as part of his effort to assume the place and authority to declare that any law violates the Constitution, or any part of it, and his ordering that DOMA not be defended in court and enforced, like any other law passed by Congress and signed into law by any previous President (in this case Bill Clinton)…despite the fact that our Constitution delegates that place and authority to neither the Executive Branch (President) nor the Legislative Branch (Congress) but does in fact specifically assign and delegate that place and authority to the Judicial Branch (the United States Supreme Court)?

      Second, I am all for equality under the law which, under our Constitution, includes the fact that the President has neither the place nor the authority to decide or pick and choose which law is or is not Unconstitutional and will or will not be defended in court and enforced, but now the question is:

      Where in it does our Constitution, specifically in this case the 5th Amendment, specifically address and apply against any law, including DOMA, passed by Congress and signed into law by any previous President(s), and authorize and justify Obama (or any subsequent President) deciding and ordering which laws are or aren’t in violation of the Constitution and are or aren’t to be defended and enforced, as Obama is evidently determined to do?

      Or in other words, isn’t it evident that Obama is again misusing and misrepresenting to usurp position, authority, and power which, as in this case, the Constitution specifically assigns to the Judicial (the U.S. Supreme Court) to decide whether or not any law is or is not Constitutional and is or is not to be defended and enforced, and so evidently crown himself as the one who will decide which law is or is not Constitutional and, even further, which, when, where, how, and in what cases any law, including DOMA and any other law, passed by Congress and signed into law by a President of the United States, will or will not be defended and enforced?

    95. Ayasha, United State says:

      Marriage is a commitment of love, respect and fidelity made between two people and before God. God actually cares diddly squat if someone is homosexual or not. Homosexuality is a genetic behavioral trait that has sensitivity to the environment in its expression. The reality is that more than likely people who are heterosexuals are carrying homosexual genes. The right combo of egg and sperm can produce heterosexual and homosexual offspring. The trait is likely kept then in a population because it is in a sense 'hidden' within the DNA. If every homosexual were allowed to be themselves and not get into heterosexual marriages to hide themselves, then after hundreds of year, homosexual genes would be selected out of the genome. Forcing people to pretend they are not gay is actually what maintains homosexual gene frequency..

      The true threat to marriage is infidelity. It seems always to be those that advocate most vigorously against homosexuality are people who are being unfaithful to their spouse or who have enough homosexual genes within to promote homosexual behavior. Out of fear, it is then repressed or acted upon in private until uncovered. (Look at the multitude of Republicans who are unfaithful or who are married and suddenly uncovered to be homosexuals.)

      In high probability Christ may return as a homosexual just so God can make a point.

    96. Pat, WA says:

      John Boehner said in an interview on March 3rd, that Congress will come up with a plan to defend DOMA. He was very strong in his comments that DOMA IS THE LAW, and like all other laws in the U.S. is must be defended in court if challenged. This issue is not about whether we agree or disagree with DOMA, it's about upholding laws. If you do not defend DOMA, no matter what side of the issue you are on, would you also like other laws "not defended"? Would you also like Roe vs. Wade, not defended, the law against euthanasia, not defended? Does this not tell you how important it is to defend all laws? If you don't want DOMA, then have Congress vote on it again. BTW DOMA passed in Congress under Bill Clinton, with a Super Majority, not by one or two votes.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×