Obama, the DOMA and overstepping bounds. Is anyone worried?

[hikingonthru]

I was wondering who else besides me is very worried about this jassankle Obama and his "Executive Declarations" on the constitutionality of DOMA.

Now, whether or not you believe in gay marriage or not should not be an issue. Let us put that aside. Let's say, for argument's sake, Obama has issued an order that Widgets and not consitutional when there is a congressionally instituted federal law stating that Widgets are legal. Not only that, let us say that a president then orders his Justice Dept. to stop defending widgets...when there are in fact several instances of litigation pending in which the defense of Widgets rests on the Justice Dept. The Justice Dept...which is supposed to defend the interests of the US when it is sued....is now ordered by the president to NOT do this anymore.

The brief states"
"The President has also concluded that Section 3 of widgets, as appliedto legally married widget couples, fails to meet that standard and is therefore unconstitutional. Given that conclusion, the President has instructed the Department not to defend the statute in such cases. I fully concur with the President’s determination. Consequently, the Department will not defend the constitutionality of Section 3 of DOMA as applied to same-sex married couples in the two cases filed in the Second Circuit.

Who in the name of the world is the President to do such a thing? Where in the executive duties does interpretation and disenactment of congressional law fall?
Render an opinion? sure...he is still a citizen. But to employ his Executive office to stop the Justice dept. from enforcing a law the HE HAS DECIDED is unconstitutinal??? PEOPLE...THIS IS DICTATORSHIP!!!!

In another key section of the announcement, DOJ says:

" We will, however, remain parties to the cases and continue to represent the interests of the United States throughout the litigation. I have informed Members of Congress of this decision, so Members who wish to defend the statute may pursue that option. The Department will also work closely with the courts to ensure that Congress has a full and fair opportunity to participate in pending litigation. "

So, the Pres (if you can call him that) and his Atty. General are going to issue an ORDER that the Justice Dept. is to NOT defend a congressionally approved federal law b/c HE HAS CONCLUDED it is unconstitutional but they are going to see to it that the interests of the US are represented? Can anyone say DOUBLESPEAK??? Does this not sound like "1984" to anyone????

Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution of the United States plainly outlines the responsibilities of the Exective branch.

"He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States."

CONGRESS MAKES AND REPEALS LAWS!!!! NOT THE PRESIDENT!!!! THERE IS A PROCESS!!! WHY DID HE NOT GO THROUGH IT???

A: He is a megalomaniac who thinks the country and the world belong to him.

So you say, "Well, I like widgets and I think widgets should have the same marital rights as everyone." SO? Do we excuse abuse of power and overstepping of bounds b/c we it works for something we agree with? (That is "the ends justifies the means" kind of thinking. Hitler had that sort of thinking.) Perhaps you do not care..."so what...just a bunch of widgets...longs as they widget over there away from me."

What about the precedent it sets? What happens when later on some president decides that the Civil Rights Act is unconstitutional??? Can you see the potential tragic ramifications. This nation is starting to come apart at the seams....fueled by immoral leaders and complacent citizenry. (You see, this is what happens when we allow "moral relativism" creep in and everyone "makes their own truth"....it is happening in the Oval Office right now.)

And if think the president is doing the "widget community" some sort of huge favor, ask yourself, "If Widgets were so important to the President, why did he not try to do something about it when he had a democrat majority house and senate the first two years? Moreover, why didn't the President to try to do something about this when he was a senator? Why is he waiting until Congress is out of session to do this?"

No matter what side of the political aisle you are on...this ought to scare the bejinkers out of you!!!!

[FAADAN]

Some are saying it is an impeachable offense to not defend laws passed by Congress in the courts.

[Fried Squash]

It doesn't scare me, but it does make me very angry. That's why we need a Pres. that spent most of his time growing up in this country. He might understand how this country is suppose to work. Just remember God has a plan. No need to be scared, but be prepared.

[faitzfunny]

"Oh my God, marriage is no longer being defended!
Did you hear that, gays? Attack! Attack! Attack!" -- Jon Stewart

LOL !!!!

[hikingonthru]

Originally Posted by faitzfunny

"Oh my God, marriage is no longer being defended!
Did you hear that, gays? Attack! Attack! Attack!" -- Jon Stewart

LOL !!!!

Ok...we get it..ur gay friendly. Now, quit being silly. Focus on the issue of Presidential abuse of power and overstepping of the executive branch.

What do you think about it???

[Ohiorganic]

If you married people haven't been dragged from your homes by the gay hoards, it's just a matter of time
http://www.theonion.com/articles/mar...less-ci,19325/

they are coming so put on something nice

[robbie]

Originally Posted by faitzfunny

"Oh my God, marriage is no longer being defended!
Did you hear that, gays? Attack! Attack! Attack!" -- Jon Stewart

LOL !!!!

Yeah, it's kind of a funny issue. Most people are not gay, so no worries when it comes to people marrying and having children. I wonder how many people have considered the fact that gay people are the result of heterosexual relationships.

[faitzfunny]

Originally Posted by hikingonthru

Ok...we get it..ur gay friendly. Now, quit being silly. Focus on the issue of Presidential abuse of power and overstepping of the executive branch.

What do you think about it???

I'm not gay friendly... I'm LOVE friendly

I think I have NO RIGHT whatsoever to say who marries and who doesn't.
How pompous of me to think I ever could !
Nor does anyone else. What happens between 2 consenting adults is not my
or anyone else's business.

What abuse of power ??? what overstepping ?? I thought he was overstepping by getting involved in the first place. I think it is 100% unconstitutional to permit some to marry and not others. It is, afterall, the pursuit of happiness. Should I tell you who to love ? I just thought... hey ! I can say it's against God's plan for interracial people to marry... do you think I have that right ? Don't say it's different. It's the same. It's discrimination based on race instead of gender.

by the way,
I am against hetero marriages based on property and power.

[nedwina]

It's not tyranny, it's pragmatism. Pragmatism, and his job description: to uphold the Constitution.

There are a number of DOMA lawsuits on the docket that will chew up time & money, and be lost anyway. Time & money that we simply don't have to waste on a weak "morality" based law that will be overturned by the Supremes when it gets there.

All Obama is doing, is saying: "Let's cut to the chase, and stop defending it."

Because it is indefensable. It is a loathesome, pandering law that violates other Constitutional protections. It's time to let it go.

As to the Executive Branch overstepping its bounds, you can thank GWB for paving the way on that. Back during his administration Dems blinked, screamed, & didn't like his antics. But eventually the pendulum swings. And look who's enjoying some executive overreaching now?

[Drew Dubious]

Originally Posted by nedwina

As to the Executive Branch overstepping its bounds, you can thank GWB for paving the way on that. Back during his administration Dems blinked, screamed, & didn't like his antics. But eventually the pendulum swings. And look who's enjoying some executive overreaching now?

Sad yet true