Obama Admin. Calls on Supreme Court to Strike Down Defense of Marriage Act Defining Marriage As Between a Man and Woman
AP
The Obama administration on Friday formally urged the Supreme Court to strike down the federal Defense of Marriage Act defining marriage as between a man and a woman.
In a brief filed Friday evening, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli argued that DOMA’s section three, which bars married same-sex couples from filing joint federal tax returns and other federal spousal benefits, is unconstitutional:
Section 3 of DOMA violates the fundamental constitutional guarantee of equal protection. The law denies to tens of thousands of same-sex couples who are legally married under state law an array of important federal benefits that are available to legally married opposite-sex couples. Because this discrimination cannot be justified as substantially furthering any important governmental interest, Section 3 is unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments in United States v. Windsor on March 27. At issue is whether the law violates the Fifth Amendment guarantee of equal protection for legally married same-sex couples. The case surrounds Edith Windsor, who was forced to pay a federal estate tax of $363,053 upon the death of her wife, while heterosexual spouses are generally able to inherit estates tax-free.
The Obama administration’s brief comes almost exactly a year after Obama instructed the Justice Department to no longer defend DOMA’s constitutionality.
Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.
Popular Stories
Obama Doesn’t Return Marine’s Salute, Shakes Hand Instead — Is This a Protocol Misstep? 441 Comments
Game-Changing Bombshell? There’s a Major Twist in the Story About a High School Student’s Lesbian Relationship With a Minor 397 Comments
Is the Boy Scouts’ Gay Amendment the ‘Beginning of the End’ for the Group? (Plus: Tell Us Where You Stand) 339 Comments
Church vs. State Complaint Leads City to Remove Christian Crosses on Water Tower — Now See What They’ve Been Replaced With 316 Comments
This Could Be the Most Haunting Statistic You’ll Ever See 267 Comments
Faith
-
Priest Gunned Down by Italian Mobsters Now Beatified
Read More
-
Game-Changing Bombshell? There’s a Major Twist in the Story About a High School Student’s Lesbian Relationship With a Minor
397 Comments
- Is the Boy Scouts’ Gay Amendment the ‘Beginning of the End’ for the Group? (Plus: Tell Us Where You Stand) 339 Comments
-
MSNBC Hosts Martin Bashir and Chris Hayes Claim London Machete Killers Aren’t Terrorists: ‘These Are Just Murderers’
166 Comments
-
Did You Catch the Possibly Policy-Changing Ft. Hood Reference in Obama’s Terror Speech?
102 Comments
Business
-
Have You Had Scotch at a NJ TGI Friday’s Lately? You Might Have Been Drinking Rubbing Alcohol
Read More
-
Venezuelan President Blames Toilet Paper Shortage on the Rich
100 Comments
-
This Terrible Chart Shows the Change in Food Stamp Participation Over the Last 10 Years
Read More
- Disney Makes Absolutely Mortifying Photoshop Mistake Read More
-
Trey Gowdy at It Again — This Time with a Jack Bauer Reference!
121 Comments
Technology
- ‘My Life Is Full of Blessings’: Flesh-Eating Bacteria Victim Who Lost All Limbs Smiles as She Shows Off New Bionic Hands Read More
-
LOOK: Woman Claims to Have Photographed UFO in California
124 Comments
-
Lion Named ‘Bonedigger’ and Small Dog Make Most Unlikely Companions
Read More
-
Rocket Bike Sets Land Speed Record — and Uses a Fuel You Wouldn’t Expect
Read More
-
How 3D Printing Technology Created a Special Part for Baby’s Windpipe and Saved His Life
Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (342)
thegreatcarnac
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:46pmThis obama-regime is height of lies and perversity. Obama and his minions discriminate against white people, they kowtow to our enemies, they insult and desert our friends, they give weapons to countries who are known to be against us, they will impose socialized medicine and death panels, they want to destroy the constitution and take away our weapons, they fully support abortion, and the support the perversity of homosexual marriage by trying to force it on the states. Enough is enough. We must do something or lose everything.
Report this comment
FOREIGNANDDOMESTIC
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:04pmGREATCARNAC
As I´ve said before under my other screen name, Obama is a worker of iniquity. That means, my friend, that he is indeed perverse, and nothing, and I mean, NOTHING, good can come from him. Unless you are a Christian, you won´t really understand just how evil he is. Methinks he will destroy us, but God will destroy him.
Report this comment
wrightbobo
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:38pmMost adult people know what their body cavities and sex organs are designed for. Only early child abuse, misuse, experimentation and acceptance will cause such sexual disorientation.
No free nation can survive the death of virtue and common sense.
Report this comment
SUNTZU
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:23pmF*A*G*=
British for Cigarette
also Servant
Could refer to
Airport in Iceland
Guatemalan air force
A medical procedure
List of grave sites
and a terror group in the Canary Islands
F*A*G*G*O*T*=Effeminate man
Also the man that stayed home friday nights when you and your
budds went out to roll Q*U*E*E****S
Report this comment
Brasil2520
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:21pmSo now 2/22/13 will be known as perverts & weirdo’s day, the in your face parade coming soon.
Report this comment
blue_rain
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:19pmWe do not need same sex marriage rights, we need people rights. A marriage is between a man and a women; Only a Liberal would want to murk it up and call it something else. A marriage license is nothing more than a contract with man made laws woven into it and nothing more, and an expensive contract to get out that feeds the money hungry lawyers.
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:34pmIf a marriage is just between a man and woman, then why does the federal government have anything to do with it? And if it is a private contract – why does someone without that contract pay more in taxes?
Report this comment
SUNTZU
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:21amSoy
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Report this comment
HarryPotter
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 1:46amIf marriage really is nothing more than a contract, why do you care if 2 men or 2 women want to get married?
Report this comment
jwpowers41
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 8:14amhomosexuals are trying to legitimize their perverted lifestyle to alleviate their own guilt and
they want us to ok it no way!!!!
Report this comment
HarryPotter
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:50pmjwpowers:
No, we do not want your acceptance. Your personal opinion does not matter at all to us. What we want is equality.
Report this comment
LordAzrael
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 1:02pm“A marriage is between a man and a women; Only a Liberal would want to murk it up and call it something else.”
Are you a Mormon? Just wondering why you used the plural form of “woman.”
Also, not wanting government to interfere in people’s relationships is a conservative value. It’s nanny statism that says the government should be responsible for defining marriage in the first place.
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:01pmwell if two people are legally married in a state – i think the federal government should respect it. I certainly dont think it is the role of the federal government to say which groups of people they will recognize as being married. When there is money/benefits involved, i think the ‘equal protection’ clause is invoked
Report this comment
Kupo
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 1:34amWhen DOMA comes up and I see the Blazers flock in to support it I often ask them to cite the part of the Constitution that allows Congress the authority to define marriage. Obviously, the answers I receive (when I receive them at all) don’t make any sense.
Report this comment
HarryPotter
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 2:10amSoy:
Thank you! That was one of the most logical posts I’ve seen all day! But I would argue one step further. Gay marriage should be legal in every state. When you have different laws in different states, that is just setting different precedents, and allowing certain areas of the country to discriminate. Civil rights should never be available to be voted upon.
Report this comment
moreoilplease
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 6:15amThere’s no question this is an equal protection under the law situation. The only solution is for the state governments to get out of the sanction of marriage business. The state can sanction who can perform a legal ceremony, i.e. a notary public or judge. But not who can enter into legal union. Well, within similar boundaries of current law i.e. must be 18 to enter into a legal binding contract etc. The federal government has no authority over marriage to begin with and that should stay that way. It does have authority over tax and property issues which is just a matter of tweaking current law.
This is the only constitutional, fair resolution because if the federal government gets into the marriage business it will then force churches to perform same sex marriages against there will, which is what progressives want. And that would be very much unconstitutional.
So, it comes down to maximum freedom for all, or tear one institution down to build up another. And yes, forcing churches to perform same sex marriages would be forcing them to abandon dogma thus impeding the free exercise of religion.
In fact, this has puzzled me for some time why the gay community has not brought the issue of equal protection to the courts. It’s a slam dunk.
The gay community is looking for equal protection, which is guaranteed under the constitution and progressives are looking to use gays like a baseball bat to bludgeon religion to death.
Report this comment
moreoilplease
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 6:54amBy the way H potter, marriage is not a civil right. It’s not a right period. No where in the bill of rights does it say anyone has a right to marriage. It is sanctioned by states, not the federal government.
Being gay is not the same as being a particular race or ethnicity.
When states get out of the marriage business, guess what will happen? Maximum freedom for all.
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 8:02am@HarryPotter
In my ideal world, state and federal government would have NOTHING to do with marriage so it wouldnt be an issue. In my ideal world, people would not be taxed differently whether they are married or have kids – know what i mean?
If the government did not tax and treat married people differently – then i wouldnt have a problem if the people of a state decided they will not allow gay marriage. I dont think marriage is an individual right, per se. I think letting each state decide is a good compromise between the pro and anti-gay marriage crowds
Report this comment
HarryPotter
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:57pmOil:
You are kind of right, being gay is not an ethnicity, it is a sexual orientation. It is an identity we wear just like race, religion, gender, marriage status, etc. All refer to categories in which you were born and have no control over. You should not be able to discriminate based on any of these categories, yet homosexuals are still discriminated against by the government, and not afforded the same rights as heterosexuals. But I would be perfectly fine with the government getting out of the whole marriage thing, then you would have no more rights and benefits than I do. That is what we are seeking, equality. If marriage is a right, we all need to have that right. If it is not a right, how come the government will recognize your marriage and not mine?
Report this comment
HarryPotter
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 1:03pmSoy:
See my above comments, I would be fine with the government out of the marriage business. My one issue with your comment was the idea of giving it to the states to decide. That would just prolong the issue, legally allow some states to actively discriminate, and create a whole slew of new problems about marriage recognition if a couple travels or moves. I appreciate the thought of finding a compromise on the issue, and I also appreciate you devoting some thought and logic to this issue, but this would not be the right solution.
Report this comment
moreoilplease
Posted on February 24, 2013 at 2:46amHarry
I’m not kinda right, I am right. Rights are spelled out explicitly in the first ten amendments of the constitution. If you would like to add to them, there is a way to do it by constitutional amendment. Rights, under the constitution, are NOT what you “think” it should be or “feel” it should be and cannot be rescinded. You can’t just make “rights” up. It is sanctioned by states and they decide who can be legally married. And there are mechanisms in place to change this.
Making the argument that the homosexual community is born that way is a non starter. I can’t prove it and neither can you. It’s subjective. Civil rights laws are clear and refer to race, ethnicity and skin color; not subjective. Quite frankly it’s a little insulting to compare the two.
Under this current law, DOMA, they are denied equal protection under the law. Taxed at a different rate etc. This law should be struck down. Equal protection under the constitution does not include marriage as that is sanctioned by states.
Under the constitution, the federal government cannot compel the states to sanction gay marriage. PERIOD (added for emphasis). On the state level the argument should be to get the state out of marriage sanction. More will be willing to get behind it. Religious people can still believe what they want and gays will be able to marry if they want. Maximum freedom for all.
Simple solutions all based in the constitution and rule of law not “feelings”.
Report this comment
HarryPotter
Posted on February 24, 2013 at 3:04amOil,
I like you. You are using logic and evidence to back up your comments. But you are still not 100% there. First, I never argued for “feelings” being used for rights. And you cannot use “feelings” to deny a person the rights and benefits that the government already gives you. As for sexuality being an inborn trait, it seems pretty obvious to me. If it is still confusing to you, then do an experiment. Try to become gay for a day, change your attractions to your own gender. You could also do a poll. As every gay man and woman you know and meet if they had a choice. That will give you your answer. Have you ever found it odd that it is only straight people that try to claim sexuality is a choice?
And yes, civil rights do apply to homosexuals too. Look up the term. Civil rights apply to every regardless of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Our movement for equality does not match up with the Civil Rights movement in the ’60s, they had much more to get through. But sexuality is a legitimate category, and you cannot deny us our civil rights.
And again, if the feds got out of marriage, I would be fine with that. EQUALITY! But if they will recognize your marriage and not mine, then there is a problem.
Report this comment
am123
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:48pmObama is no Christian. He brings forth evil fruit. The aroma of the fruits he bears are a stench in the nostrils of the Most High.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
—Matthew 7
Report this comment
RIDEMODELS
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:53pmBring the meteors…This world she is done..!!
PS….Hit the Whitehouse first or maybe take out Airforce one would be a nice twist…..Sorry Mr. Pilot.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:43pmDeuteronomy 25:11-12
If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.
Keatonc333
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:44pmAlso you have to love this! Plants are made on the third day before there was a sun to drive their photosynthetic processes Genesis (1:14-19). 1:11 Thought that was really funny!
am123
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:59pmThere was light on the first day (see Genesis 1:3).
But even though you weren’t aware light was created on Day 1, what’s really funny is just because the plants were made on Day 3 and the sun was made on Day 4, you thought the plants were going to die? Do you have any plants in your house? If so, do you keep the lights on 24 hours so the plants don’t die overnight because there’s no light? LOL!
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:04amSO you actually believe the world was created in 6 days?
SUNTZU
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:04amK
You need to read genesis again
After you finish 2cd grade.
Report this comment
TH777
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:08am@Keatonc666: Please name some of the “observed” homosexual species for me.
Report this comment
TH777
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:15am@Keatonc666: As long as you are still breathing there is still hope for you through Jesus Christ. I hope some day you come to your senses.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:21amTH777 most species of Dolphins, Dogs, swans, penguins, humans, gulls, mallards, pidgins, vultures, Bison, Elephants, giraffes, many lesser Monkey species, Bonobo, Chimpanzee, Gorilla, macaque, lions, many species of small cat, sheep, hyena, Various different insects and lizard species as well. there are a lot more.. heres a link showing just a select few from the entire list..
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/list-of-animals-displaying-homosexual-behavior/blog-41329/?link=ibaf&q=list%20of%20animals%20who%20demonstrate%20homosexuality
Keatonc333
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:22amTH777 also heres another link… it says over 1,500 species practice homosexuality..
http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718.aspx
Keatonc333
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:23amTH777… also thank you for the sentiment in your last post : )
TH777
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:42am@Keatonc666: I appreciate the links but my point is even if there were homosexuality amongst animals, which I honestly don’t believe, they would no longer exist. Homosexuals cannot procreate. Do you follow what I’m trying to say?? As an added note….you seem to know a lot of Bible verses which means you have actually picked up a Bible and read it. So many people are ignorant of the words and teachings of the Bible. They spew hatred without knowing Gods word. I truly believe that God is calling you but you’re fighting Him. I’ve read many of your posts and at first I thought you were just a “troll” because I couldn’t comprehend why a person who is so against what we believe would keep coming back just to argue with us. It’s a waste of time. I no longer wonder why. I believe it’s God that keeps bringing you back. No, not every person who calls themselves a Christian is truly a Christian. No, Christians are not perfect and if any Christian proclaims to be then you can write them off as a “genuine” Christian. We sin. We sin constantly but we are forgiven. We get angry. We lose our temper. We say things we shouldn’t out of sheer frustration but we are forgiven. I haven’t lost hope in you Keaton!
Report this comment
For my Liberty!
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:44am@ Keatonc333… You IDIOT..those are NOT “Homosexual species” Of COURSE there are FREAKS of Nature and a SMALL percentage of EACH Species could be homosexual, but by NO MEANS is ANY WHOLE SPECIES…IF they WERE, they would be EXTINCT! *rotflmao* DUH
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 1:03amFor my liberty… never once did I say there was a “homosexual species” I said there are many species that demonstrate homosexuality.. obviously a species made up of entirely homosexuals would go extinct..
and TH777.. Take what I said above but word it nicer! : ) Heterosexuality is needed for a species survival… that being said it is not needed for every member of that species to procreate, and I wish we as a highly evolved species could appreciate and include those who do not. Secondly Thank you for the very kind words… I’ve changed my views on a higher power many a time in my life.. its constantly evolving if you will… Though I would not say I am a christian, I also can not rule out the possibility of a creator… I don’t know honestly.. I just have a problem when people try to demonize or discriminate others based on their personal beliefs.. for example if shiria law came to America, which will never happen, and they tried to outlaw the practice of christianity. I would 100% have the Christians back!
TH777
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 1:19am@Keatonc333: I am seeing a whole different side of you tonight. (notice I didn’t use 666 this time) I believe in live and let live. I was not put on this earth to be the judge and jury of people. Do I have strong beliefs…..yes I do! Do I believe in homosexuality…no I don’t but I’m not your judge and jury. I would not want to stand in anyone’s way of happiness. This life is very hard! The only thing I wish you would do is to pursue God. Whether you believe in Him or not. Go to Him. Tell Him you don’t believe in Him. Tell Him to make himself real to you. You would be amazed at what He can do. I have had an extremely hard life to the point where I did not believe there was a God. I used to question the existence of God constantly and then all of a sudden one day the unraveling began. I know it can happen for you too. God Bless! :)
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 1:39amBless you too TH777 : ) and I wish everyone shared your mindset! I love people with strong convictions! just not so much people who use them to judge others! you are so right! no one on earth should seem fit to judge another who is at the very least not harming someone! As for going to God.. I promised my girlfriend I would go to church with her sunday.. so who knows, could be the start of something! : ) I feel I must say I absolutely LOVE the overall message of jesus… Love your brother, the golden rule, etc. I love it! its just some christians that tick me off…
I loved this chat by the way! Found it very kind and refreshing! thank you!
TH777
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 1:58am@Keatonc333: Just keep 2 things in mind. #1-Not all people who call themselves Christians are “truly” Christians and #2- Christians are human too and tend to get frustrated and lash out and say unkind things. It’s our sinful nature. I am guilty of that myself and I’m not proud of it in the least.
I’m so thrilled to hear you will be going to Church this Sunday. May God’s blessing be with you!! I enjoyed this “chat” also! :)
Report this comment
Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 5:36amKeatonc333
I’m always ready to denounce evil or outdated Bible verses, but that Deuteronomy 25:11-12, that’s actually a pretty good rule. I’m down with that one. It is important that women be discouraged from handling a man’s junk in an unkind manner. What’s more important, one on one is a fair fight. Jumping in and ganging up two on one is wrong. The men should both understand that. If women can’t understand that, then we need to explain it to the in terms they can comprehend, like: “You don’t want to get your dear little hand cut off, do you?”
Report this comment
Dan_o
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 9:39amThe Deuteronomy verse has to do with protecting God’s promise to His people, Israel. He promised them Land, Seed, and Blessing and that law protected the seed portion of the blessing.
Keaton, I am also guilty of lashing out and for that I apologize. I hope you do enjoy the service you attend and that God grabs a hold of you.
Report this comment
truthnstuff
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 3:03pmKeaton, you truly are an idiot. Your sub-human ideologies can be refuted, so your point is as useless as you.
http://narth.com/docs/animalmyth.html
Report this comment
Eddie Estes
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 4:31pmThis line of reasoning is unsustainable. If seemingly “homosexual” acts among animals are in accordance with animal nature, then parental killing of offspring and intra-species devouring are also in accordance with animal nature. Bringing man into the equation complicates things further. Are we to conclude that cannibalism is according to human nature?
Report this comment
TommyGuns
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:43pmJust some questions for you homophobes: How does allowing two people who love each other and are committed to one another somehow cheapen traditional marriage simply because they’re of the same gender? Seems to me that with a divorce rate of over 50%, traditional couples have done a pretty good job of cheapening marriage already. If the purpose of traditional marriage is procreation, or at least the possibility of procreation, then it must follow that a traditional couple who cannot have children because of some physical inability should also be denied the right to marry. Moreover, if you go down that road it also must follow, logically at least, that couples who prevent conception by the use of birth control or contraceptives should have their marriages declared null and void, or should have to sign a statement under oath that they will not attempt to prevent conception.
As for those of you on here who continue to insist that the majority of the public is against same sex marriage, you really need to check your facts. A clear majority of Americans now support same sex marriage, and that majority is growing. For those of you who rely on biblical teachings to reinforce your belief, tell me where that reliance ends. Should we begin stoning people who commit adultery, or who have sex outside of marriage? Should we execute those who curse their parents, or who take the name of God in vain, or wear clothes made of different fabrics?
Small World
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:50pmJust keep repeating the lie. Most people do not approve of same sex marriage. Marriage= one man one women end of story.
Report this comment
guitarspook
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:53pmThe bible is the most cherry picked piece of literature ever. The same people that cry foul over pick and choose tactics over the constitution are the worse perveyors of the same.
Report this comment
tnman65
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:22pmI do not ever remember being asked. No I do not approve. I assume these surveys were done in California or maybe New York? But hey, keep believing that crap if it makes you feel better.
Report this comment
blue_rain
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:29pmNothing wrong with giving people rights, but how far are you willing to go TommyGuns? You think people should allow marriage among those who practice bestiality, children to marry under the age 6? It is your kind of thinking that allows the inevitable dominos to fall. Remember you pass one law, the domino effect begins.
Report this comment
am123
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:35pmShould we begin stoning people who commit adultery, or who have sex outside of marriage? Should we execute those who curse their parents, or who take the name of God in vain, or wear clothes made of different fabrics?
———————–
No. If you understood the difference between the Old and New Covenants, you wouldn’t have asked such questions. We are living in the age of grace. But that is no excuse for promoting perversion. When the ruling authorities of a nation promote perversion, it degrades all of that society.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:47pmAM123… the only time homosexuality is portrayed as a sin in the bible is in the old covenant.. maybe if you knew the difference between the two you wouldn’t have responded.
TH777
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:48pm@Tommyguns: Your post is utter stupidity. Keep twisting things and turning words and keep adjusting things to try to make your point logical. God made man and woman to be together whether they can procreate or not. If the parts don’t fit, they don’t belong together!
Report this comment
am123
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:05amAM123… the only time homosexuality is portrayed as a sin in the bible is in the old covenant.. maybe if you knew the difference between the two you wouldn’t have responded.
———–
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
—Romans 1
Report this comment
am123
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:14amKeatonc333,
You need to watch Animal Planet or National Geographic more. The males of the species don’t make love to the other males, they fight the other males for the right to mate with the females.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:15amThat doesn’t make it a sin.. your talking about human law and thought process. any quotes from Jesus? you know the son of God decrying homosexuality? by the way.. why not go ahead and add the sentences before you started the quote? The romans quotes you just put up have nothing to do with homosexuality.. they have to do with worshiping false idols.. nice try! haha
Romans 1 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
BUSTED!
am123
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:24amany quotes from Jesus?
————
Yeah, here you go:
“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”
— Leviticus 20:13
And yes, Jesus is the Word made flesh. That was Jesus who gave the Law to Moses.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:25amAM123… read these links.. yes thats the more common practice.. but it is not the whole story.. some 1,500 different species practice homosexuality.
http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718.aspx
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/list-of-animals-displaying-homosexual-behavior/blog-41329/?link=ibaf&q=list%20of%20animals%20who%20demonstrate%20homosexuality
This link names a few of them… it names over a hundred but they are just the well known species..
am123
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:47amman.. thats stretching it! I do assume you never eat pork right? because apparently Jesus told you not to…..
—————-
Actually I do eat pork, because I am free because I belong to Jesus.
The Law of Moses was made obsolete when Jesus was nailed to the cross and died for the sins of mankind (see Hebrews 8:13). However, the Law will not be done away with until this present earth and heaven disappear. Jesus came to fulfill the Law, which remains intact for this present heaven and earth (see Matthew 5:17-18). But when the Alpha and Omega creates the new heavens and the new earth (see Revelation 21:5), the obsolete Law of Moses will be done away with permanently and the new eternal order of things will apply as spoken of by the Book of Revelation, the Book of Ezekiel, and other books in the Bible. However, for those who belong to the High Priest Jesus, who is in the order of Melchizedek (see Hebrews 5:6), we can partake now of the eternal things, of the age to come. We can enter into the Most Holy of Holies in heaven via the blood of the Jesus. We are free now from the Law of Moses as we can now partake of the age to come by faith. Hence, I can eat pork if I want. That freedom however, does not give one a license to commit sexual immorality and perversion. That would be insulting the Spirit of grace.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 1:10amOk… so if the law is obsolete then whats the problem with gay marriage… and If the law still exists why do you eat pork? why can you differentiate between the two? as they are both Gods law.. I’m not trying to be confrontational.. I just want to know why one is worse than the other… like homosexuality is wrong… but its ok to get re-married.. though both are laws of moses… and if we are free from those laws, why would some still apply?
am123
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 1:35amThe Law of Moses shows us what is wrong. The eating of pork was a dietary law, forbidden because pork is not healthy. But the transgression of that law was not punishable by death. Homosexuality was a grave abomination that was punishable by death.
As I said before, because we are free from the Law does not give us a license to commit sexual immorality.
Now if you excuse me, before I turn in for the night, I’ve got to turn on the lights for my plants lest they die overnight! :)
Report this comment
TH777
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 1:38am@Keatonc333: You sound just like me before I became a believer. Ohhhh, the questions I had and there is nothing wrong with having so many questions. God loves when you are a non believer but still care enough to question. I truly believe that he is tugging at your heart. May I make a suggestion? Find a Bible teaching church and speak with the Pastor there. If you find a good Bible teaching church they will have no problem with sitting with you and answering your questions. I suggest a Calvary Chapel Church. I know for a fact that they teach straight from the Bible. The answers to your questions are there. Please go and ask them. You will not be turned away.
Report this comment
catty
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 3:28pmTommy you used the word logic in your post. The blazers aren’t familiar with that.
Report this comment
guitarspook
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:43pmCongress makes laws, the the White House picks and chooses which laws to execute and the Supreme Court interprets the laws. They all serve, supposedly as a check and balance. But who might I ask is the check and balnce on the Supreme Court?? Anyone ever thought that the judicial system as it pertains to law upholding and striking, has no tool to enforce its decisions. NONE! ZIP! For the dunderheads, the check on the Court is the STATES! When the court errors, a given state simply needs but ignore. If it is in fact a loner among the major of the states, that state will be ostracized and penalized financially. If it is one among the many, then that law goes no where pressure from neighbor states would be useless. in effect, the supreme court would be nullified in its decision. As the progressives have turned to nine emperors once all the amendments they needed were in the bag, amending the constitution is nearly impossible. Ignoring rule by misguided interpretation is the only option left.
Report this comment
RIDEMODELS
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:51pmState ignores,State gets no Gov funds, State dies…..There inlies the problem….Money makes this country go round and Obama the racist controls it all…..I would hate to be Obama once the gates of Hell open up for him, good thing he is Living it up here on earth cause Heaven is not an option for him…..For his sake his no Heaven or Hell hunch better be right.
Report this comment
DLV
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:39pmReally you gotta stop using the word F@g. It makes it look like we Christians hate homosexuals when we don’t, we hate the sin. If you are going to say that at least make sure you explain that you hate the sin but Jesus loved the person.
Report this comment
RightThinking1
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:29pm“marriage is between a man and a woman” – Barack Obama 2008
What he failed to add is “unless I can buy votes by ‘evolving’..”
In the final analysis, this is about two things, pandering for votes, and distracting from a collapsing economy. Welcome to the Rome of Caligula.
Report this comment
Jake Dog2
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:47pmWell said
Report this comment
Restored One
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:48pm@Right thinking…..BINGO!
Report this comment
Brasil2520
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:36pmHere !!! Here !!!
Report this comment
AverageWhiteMale
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:27pmSo when it suits their needs they adamantly insist that the 5th amendment supports this, according to their interpretation.
However, when the 2nd amendment unequivocally states that it shall not be infrnged, it’s up for discussion (one sided of course).
Hypocrites.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:51pmYou know.. that exact same argument can be used against you..
TH777
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:26am@keatonc666: If homosexuality is so “natural” tell me how many people would be in this world today if everyone became a homosexual?
Report this comment
HarryPotter
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 3:34amTh777:
If everyone suddenly became gay, then I imagine there would still be plenty of people on the Earth. Sex is not needed to have children. Gay couples and infertile couples use sperm donors and surrogate mothers all the time. But this argument is completely pointless anyway, everyone is not gay. I could make the same argument about what if everyone in the world was a woman? How many people would be around then?
Report this comment
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:26pmSo how many threats is Obama making on the Justices to ensure they will overturn this law? One more massive blow to our culture, society and foundations of the family is underway.
Even if by chance the DOMA is not overturned Obama will do so via executive order.
Report this comment
gyro
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:31pmblackmail ?
Report this comment
For my Liberty!
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:41am@ Gyro. that is how he got Ovomit Care through. Judge Roberts was blackmailed over the 2 kids he adopted in a country that did not legally allow out of country adoptions. IF they wanted to, they could make Roberts step down because of it.
Report this comment
Salamander
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:19pmWhy doesn’t The DESTROYER simply write one of his executive orders, defining marriage as whatever those being married want it to be? If he fuzzes it up enough, no body will have any idea what marriage is anymore–not that they do anyway! Anybody that wants to get married can get a FREE participation award and a peanut butter sandwich from their local government feeding station/school cafeteria!
Report this comment
Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 5:55amHe wouldn’t do that because he believes in the rule of law and the legal principles on which this country was founded. It has always been up to the states to issue marriage licenses and record marriages. The federal government and each of the states would recognize as valid all marriages performed anywhere in the country in accordance with the laws of the respective states in which they were performed – at least that’s the way it used to be until Congress passed DOMA (Devoid of Merit Act). For the first time, the federal government told the states that some of their marriages were more real than others. The federal government and the individual states were allowed to deny the validity of marriages performed under the laws of other states. This sloppy, unprincipled and unconstitutional act deserves to be and hopefully will be overturned.
Report this comment
Smokey_Bojangles
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:15pmDo any married folks here have a Federal Marriage License?
After they start letting perverts get married it might lead to such insanity like politicians NOT cheating on their wives!
Newt and Bill may have to start sleeping in their own beds!
Report this comment
Salamander
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:23pmWe can have Federally sanctioned marriage, State sanctioned marriage and Church sanctioned marriage! Gosh, if they issue a ‘marriage’ license, they can collect fees for all of this! And, keep records of who is married and who is not! (One question on the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey is “How many times have you been married?”, along with an explanation that the Census helps determine how many (Federal?) fire departments are needed in your community! Am I missing something? Why do we need these EXPENSIVE bureaucrats messing in our lives?)
Report this comment
Salamander
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:25pmNot to mention Bwaney and his, er ‘soulmate’ running a male prostitution ring out of his Washington residence! Ewwwwwww!
Report this comment
guitarspook
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:33pm@smokey…Right on the money! Obama certainly didn’t sign my certificate so who is he to define a state’s right to determine what is justly within their scope overseeing the health, safety and welfare of its citizens. The argument of equal protection is horribly muddled though. To reiterate 1_smoot_tall, Obama’s gay centered argument leaves out the sister wives clan. Such a bigot this administration! 10th Amendment anyone?
Report this comment
1_Smoot_Tall
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:14pmEqual protection is an individual right. It applies to individuals not couples. Otherwise it must also apply to triples, etc. A wise comic once said, “A slippery slope needs no vaseline.”
Also, you can bet that we will see a time when Churches are COMPELLED to marry gays and hire them for their clergy.
Finally, I foresee a time when a person will not be issued a marriage license until they have done the following:
1. Proven their participation in at least one sexually deviant relationship / encounter
2. Chosen their sexual identity
3. Explained how they came to this conclusion to the satisfaction of an Obamacare-approved social-worker
In the meantime, this topic has successfully drawn our attention away from the bigger issues that will bring the nation under destruction even sooner than will sexual deviancy.
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:09pmso 4 people walk down the street – do they have rights? Since they are a group of people and not individuals it seems the government could mow them all down at once
Report this comment
HarryPotter
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 3:46amSmoot:
The point here is that straight couples are afforded rights and benefits that gay couples are not. It would not matter to me if the government stopped recognizing marriage altogether, because then we would all be equal. As it stands however, we are not equal. That is the issue.
Report this comment
right-wing-waco
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:05pmDivide & conquer. That has been his way for the last 4 years.
Report this comment
BasketFullOfPuppies
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 9:59pmBy the same logic, couldn’t one argue that those states giving rights to same-sex marriage should overturn their laws, based on equal protection?
Report this comment
jordy2010
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 9:57pmWhat do you expect from a communist President????
Report this comment
ScottG-CO
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 9:52pmRomans 1 explains our fate.
Report this comment
greatgrandma
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:31pmThe United States is due for some really bad Karma. Death to millions of unborn Children, marriages with the same sex.. I agree with Bill O’Reilly, we truly, as a country are becoming more & more barbaric.I personally do not like that title applied to me. but, I am part of this country and while I do not agree with all this, it is still happening, and you my friends, right along with me,will have to pay dearly when the laws of the Universe return to balance. God help us and forgive us our trepasses
Report this comment
fastgen1
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 9:46pmAnd so soon after his Florida date with reggie love. He and reggie are in love and reggie wants the act to go bye, bye…
Report this comment
fastgen1
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 9:44pmWhy does he need the supreme’s, he is the black messiah, all he needs to do is proclaim it.
Report this comment
team1blazer
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 9:40pmThe flip flopper in chief has ruled. All must now comply. This imposter has continually gone against the will of the American people. Obama care was totally against the will of the people, yet was rammed down our throats. Now, we are beginning to realize just what this fiasco is going to cost the country. DOMA is the law of the land, is supported by the public, is the correct stance, yet this imposter wants HIS will to be the law of the land. O must go.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 9:44pmgone against the will? the majority of Americans support gay marriage. and abortion is also the law of the land… but that doesn’t stop the abortion debate from popping up every two years… or every two minutes on this site.
neverending
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:00pm@TEAM1BLAZER – everything he does and says is against what this country did and does stand for and this sorry sob will not quit until he finishes the transformation Absolutely a tragedy that he was given 4 more years.
Report this comment
Smokey_Bojangles
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:19pmNo Keaton,The Majority does not. Nine states,DC,with 15.7% of the US population is not a majority.
Does not make denial right,but is still not a majority.
Report this comment
DLV
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:40pmKeatonc- all your rhetoric just seems to prove your an evil person. Why not join Sauron’s side while your at it?
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:03amSmokey… gallop, cbs polls, nbc polls, fox polls, cnn polls, the pew research center, and the wall street journal all beg to differ..
SpankDaMonkey
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 9:38pm.
Again Uncle Spank has the solution to this problem too….
I still think we could get this Gay problem solved if we turned it over to Red Neck & Coonass Deer Hunters…
Step 1 Put a $100 Bounty on each one
Step 2 No Bag Limit
Step 3 Tell them the Gays Hate Mama, America and Pickup Trucks…..
And the final nail in their coffins the Gays are directly responsible for the Death of Dale Earnhardt….
That should have this thing wrapped up by St Patricks Day….
Keatonc333
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 9:28pmGood! It should be stuck down! If the judges do their job and follow the constitution, really just read the first 2 sentences of the first amendment, they will find that a biblical definition of marriage is unconstitutional in America. Its hard to tout liberty at every chance while still denying people the liberty to choose who they want to marry… come on supreme court. do your job correctly!
Report this comment
earache-my-eye
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 9:49pm@Keaton666- so when are you going to marry the the cute little poodle up the street? Can’t have the gov’t telling you who or what you can marry,right?
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 9:57pmdo you know what consent is?
Report this comment
earache-my-eye
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:11pmYou sure got a purdy mouth
Report this comment
ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:21pmEarache is a prime example of a person who either is willfully ignorant and uses stupid arguments like “well if we allow gay marriage, what stops you from marrying a dog?” or is just such a big enough moron that they don’t realize their arguments are childish.
Report this comment
JohnnyRaiden
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:28pmAs a religious institution marriage is unconstitutional as a government contract. Reading the first amendment? Why do that or why care? People read the second amendment and don’t understand what “shall not infringe” means so why give a crap about the first?
Report this comment
DLV
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 10:43pmKeatonc- plenty of teachers and underage students consent to have a relationship and yet it’s illegal. If you were truly fair, you would be arguing in favor of that.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:49pmDLV… because they are kids.. not two adults entering into a consensual relationship.. was that a real response?
Report this comment
SUNTZU
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 11:56pmHe is waiting to merry himself
only problem would be keeping his wife (right hand )
from finding out about his mistress (left hand )
and then maybe he is Arab and can have more then one
wife
Dont get mad at me
If David Letterman said it youd laugh.
Report this comment
Keatonc333
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:06amSuntzu… my wife’s name is Jill…. : ) get it? hold your hand out and look at your fingers! hint: pointer and thumb are the J
Report this comment
SUNTZU
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 12:28amJill I know
When you were here making a fool of
your self
We went to see David Letterman.
Report this comment
DLV
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 5:41pmKeatonc- 17 year olds are nearly adults, they should be able to be in a relationship right? Many are mature. By your logic I don’t see why 16 and 17 year olds can be in relationships with older people. come on now.
Report this comment
DZ-015
Posted on February 22, 2013 at 9:26pmNo surprise here. If DOMA goes, then full faith and credit will be the next thing to be argued.
Report this comment
Xylliab_of_the_Znarghh
Posted on February 23, 2013 at 5:51amActually, full faith and credit is the grounds on which DOMA is being challenged, and the grounds on which it should rightfully be repealed.
Report this comment