Clinton: Court should nix anti-gay marriage law
Former President Bill Clinton speaks at a campaign event for President Barack Obama, Thursday, Oct. 18, 2012, in Parma, Ohio. / AP Photo/Tony Dejak
WASHINGTON Former President Bill Clinton is calling on the Supreme Court to overturn a law he signed that bars federal recognition of same-sex marriages.
Clinton says the Defense of Marriage Act is incompatible with the Constitution. He says he signed the law in 1996 to avoid legislation that would have been even worse for gays.
"On March 27," Clinton writes in a Washington Post op ed, "DOMA will come before the Supreme Court, and the justices must decide whether it is consistent with the principles of a nation that honors freedom, equality and justice above all, and is therefore constitutional. As the president who signed the act into law, I have come to believe that DOMA is contrary to those principles and, in fact, incompatible with our Constitution."
"Among other things," Clinton further writes, "these [same-sex couples who are legally married in nine states and the District of Columbia] cannot file their taxes jointly, take unpaid leave to care for a sick or injured spouse or receive equal family health and pension benefits as federal civilian employees. Yet they pay taxes, contribute to their communities and, like all couples, aspire to live in committed, loving relationships, recognized and respected by our laws."
Clinton also writes that American society has changed. He says he now realizes the law discriminates against gays and provides an excuse for others to discriminate, too.
The Obama administration has stopped defending the law in court, and the Supreme Court is expected to take up a challenge to it later this month.
Separately, the high court is also considering whether California's gay marriage ban should stand.
Popular in Politics
- Romney condemns "breach of trust" in Washington 171 Comments
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice" 350 Comments
- IRS targeting overlooked biggest soft money groups 66 Comments
- For GOP, scandals could be an electoral plus - or minus 327 Comments
- Republicans use IRS scandal to tar Obamacare 36 Comments
- Ousted IRS chief: "I did not mislead" the American people
- Why Obama should worry that current scandals might impact 2016
- Immigration deal reached in House
In this thoroughly red county here in the south the Catholic church was packed with family and friends. Among those in attendenace were retired senior military officers at least one retired CMSgt, local business people, bikers, christians and atheists - pretty much a cross-section of America. Everyone of us had one thing in common and that was that we loved and respected this man who was taken from us far to soon.
Too many haters on this site that speak (or write) without thinking. Today we put to rest an American. Today we attempted to console Americans who lost a loved one. Today America became just a litlle bit less.
Hemophilia and AIDS: Silent Suffering
Hit harder by AIDS than perhaps any other group, the nation's 15,000 hemophiliacs have been racked by anguish, confusion and anger, and forced to confront a threat that is taking the lives of many and scarring the emotions of many more.
As of last week, 652 hemophiliacs had developed AIDS and 386 had died of it, according to the Federal Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta. But far more carry the virus in their bodies, which means they may become ill in the future and can pass it to others through sexual intercourse or in blood.
They contracted the virus from the very treatment that had liberated them from the tyranny of their blood disorder: clotting factors made from donated blood. Hemophiliacs, who are virtually all males because of the genetics of this inherited disease, lack blood factors that cause clotting.
The advent of a screening test in 1985 rendered the treatment essentially free of the AIDS virus. But in earlier years, close to half of all hemophiliacs became infected with the virus, studies indicate. And among the group with the most severe disorder - a group that constitutes half of all hemophiliacs -70 to 90 percent now carry the virus. Suffered in Silence
Published: May 16, 1988
of New York Times
I recall when he signed it... he didn't put up much of a struggle against what was obvious back then...
People can change, but Bill Clinton was good at lying down and not even putting up a symbolic veto - what's the reason for that, "it would cost too much money"?
Just wanted to make sure on the precise definitions, since I'm not sure on what they are and where the lines between both aspects are placed...
It's "moral".
Only the immoral can't be bothered to spell simple words...
The problem is the Supreme Court can't bypass the real issue. The definition of marriage never contained two same sex people. Everyone can get married in America as long as they are old enough, not related, and are two different humans of two different sexes. Everyone has that right.
A totally honest change should state that it wants to change the definition of marriage, then it should be stated in a way that encompasses some defined form, not just "gay marriage is a right". From the clinton suggested logic each variance of these common laws then becomes a right!
It is obvious that the phrase "founded on the Christian religion" would have a certain meaning to those whose state was "founded on" the Islamic religion. The essential message would be that America was not a Christian theocracy, or a state where the church had political power, as the religious authorities in Muslim nations had power which is something no one argues for America.
But reading George Washington's Thanksgiving Proclamation it is easy to see from the first sentence this was a nation of believers in God that would obey his will.
Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor, and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me "to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.
To be totally honest, a change should state that it wants to change the definition of marriage, then it should be stated in a way that encompasses some form, not just, "gay marriage is a right". From this logic each variance of these common laws then becomes a right!
Actually it is clear you have no idea how to do anything but change your handle on this site. And I might point out you haven't done a very good job of that either.
I guess he told me off!
It's not true! it's not true!
LOL!