ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Social Issues

President Obama Wants Supreme Court to Overturn Doma

Updated on March 25, 2013

Supreme Court to Decide if Doma is Constitutional

President Obama wants the Supreme Court to decide whether Doma is constitutional and I think it is sad. Doma was signed into law by former president Bill Clinton in 1996. According to Doma, gay couples cannot file joint tax returns and are not eligible for other government benefits.

President Obama gained many voters during his re-election by supporting gay marriage and while polls show that there is a slight increase in the support for gay marriage, it remains unpopular. My state, Florida does not support gay marriage and I am glad. President Obama wants the Supreme Court to help him strike down Doma and I think that this move is becoming a pattern for President Obama, who also asked the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of Obamacare, which he copied from Mitt Romney.

The Supreme Court should not be asked to defend President Obama's policies, which some people find unpopular such as myself. The reason for the reversal of Doma is simply because President Obama made gay marriage legal. Many people say that gay couples should have the same benefits as heterosexual couples and while this is the issue being discussed, people must remember that gay marriage is the main issue and it is a religious and partisan issue.

The majority of Christians do not support gay marriage and frankly, the economic decline in this country is coinciding with the moral decline. Gay marriage is the underlying issue here, not Doma 8. They cannot be separated and gay marriage will continue to change with each American president.

Some celebrities such as Oprah, Lady Gaga, Brad Pitt and of course, Ellen DeGeneres support gay marriage, but not everyone in Hollywood such as boxer Manny Pacquiano supports gay marriage. America was founded on Christian values and gay marriage is not one of them. What is sad about President Obama's stance on gay marriage is that before his re-election, a local Miami pastor said that he would serve two terms because his administration was characteristic of the anti-Christ and it is obvious now. Gay marriage is a sin and because we have separated church and state, the government thinks that it needs a decision as to whether gay marriage is constitutional or not.


Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Steve Orion profile image

      Steve Orion 4 years ago from Tampa, Florida

      Some factual errors here: public polling nationally shows a majority support for the notion, so it isn't "unpopular," Obama never "made gay marriage legal," there isn't an economic decline at the moment in the U.S., and moral issues like murder and rape are at their lowest levels globally than ever before, so a "moral decline" notion is nonsensical, and lastly, the U.S. has always been a secular nation.

      And those are just the factual errors, I'd address the conceptual ones though I doubt it would make much progress.

    • jdflom profile image

      Jonathan 4 years ago from Sacramento, CA

      First, where do you get your facts that gay marriage is unpopular? Everything I have been reading for the past 8 years shows that the approval has generally been increasing.

      Second, are you also suggesting that Obama shouldn't be allowed to ask the Supreme Court to take a second look at something that violates equality in this country?

      Third, America was actually not founded on Christian values. It was founded as a free nation with the freedom of religion as one of those freedoms. And when it was founded, gay marriage most likely was too outlandish at the time for it to be considered at all. We’re a progressive nation, and we used to have things like slavery, segregation and men-only voting.

      Fourth, that’s great that you consider it a sin – don’t practice it. This country is not a Christian only country, it’s a melting pot of cultures and religions from all over the world and everyone deserves happiness. I’m sorry that you feel other people shouldn't have the same freedoms and equality as you when they have done nothing wrong.

      Finally, the government doesn't think it can decide whether gay marriage is legal or not – it can, through the democratic process.

    • Sandra Remilien profile image
      Author

      Sandra Remilien 4 years ago

      These are exactly the kind of comments that I were expecting and wanted. First, I saw the public polls this morning and they only show a small percent increase and it is unpopular. I live in Florida and we do not allow gay marriage.

      Second, rape and murder are not the only crimes and in fact, two college rapes cases are in the headlines right now. Not to mention, the rape that killed the Indian girl. The founding founders were Christian and that is the basis for that statement. We have not always been a secular nation and clearly, if we had Bill Clinton would not have signed Doma over 10 years ago like I mentioned in my hub.

      Regarding Obama asking the Supreme Court to look at it, I stated that this is becoming a pattern and frankly, Obama was not a fan of the Supreme Court until they said that Obamacare was constitutional. I read and watch the news daily and I ferret fact from fiction non-stop. For example, Fox News reported a few months ago that Pres. Obama's job council only met once after a year. Instead of eating that lie, I went online and did research and blogged about how they had met several times and in fact, Fox News is getting rid of people who contribute to this type of reporting.

      Finally, regarding the democratic process for gay marriage, it's clear that this is not the case. If it was the case, the Supreme Court would not also be deciding whether Prop 8 is constitutional when the voters in California already said that they do not support gay marriage.

    • jdflom profile image

      Jonathan 4 years ago from Sacramento, CA

      Well, when you threaten to and actually take away people's civil liberties after they have already been granted, you're going to stir up some controversy. How would you feel if suddenly you lost a freedom that everyone else had? You would be okay with that? You wouldn't be up in arms and trying to overturn it? And the votes were not overwhelming one way or the other in 2008, it was roughly 48% to 52%.

      Also, according to this independent, non-partisan survey, in California, where prop 8 was, as of February 28, 2013, 61% of California voters approve of gay marriage. Is it still that unpopular?

      (Source: http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/Rls24...

    • Sandra Remilien profile image
      Author

      Sandra Remilien 4 years ago

      Honestly, I think it is hilarious that people use polls to see what is popular or not. I used to set up polls for a local TV station and they do not accurately measure opinions. We announce it once and viewers have to go online and vote. If they do not have Internet they cannot vote and that is why some people have added text messages so people can voice their opinion. There are a lot of factors that are not taken into consideration when polling. The simple fact that we are using polls to decide shows that we believe that it is not popular and we want to see if it has changed or not.

      Secondly, I feel fine that I can openly say that I do not support gay marriage. There are a lot of people who are scared to do so and the media and public are both quick to destroy anyone who does not support gay marriage. For example, when boxer Manny Pacquiao said that he did not support gay marriage last year, he was severely criticized for his view and people went as far as saying that he wants homosexuals to be killed.

      I do not support gay marriage and I stated that in my Hub. I do not expect everyone to agree.

    • jdflom profile image

      Jonathan 4 years ago from Sacramento, CA

      I am not basing all my information strictly on polls, but I'm glad you got a good laugh from that. You are entitled to your own opinion, but as mentioned earlier, you had factual inaccuracies.

      May I ask how gay marriage personally affects you? Why are you adamant about not letting others have it? What have gay people done to you that make you wish to ensure they cannot have a legal marriage?

    • Sandra Remilien profile image
      Author

      Sandra Remilien 4 years ago

      A slight increase in a poll does not mean that something is popular. I stated in my Hub that I do not support gay marriage due to religious views. Also, there is a lot that is not addressed about gay marriage. Bill Clinton signed Doma because he did not support gay marriage and now President Obama wants it overturned because he supports gay marriage. Gay marriagee will keep going back and forth with every president and sadly, people are going to keep getting heated and upset over it!

    • jdflom profile image

      Jonathan 4 years ago from Sacramento, CA

      9% is a slight increase, and being under 50% to going over 50% approval ratings is not significant? Hmm...

      Gay marriage, along with a lot of other issues will keep going back and forth with every president. It appears as though Bill Clinton has changed his mind and agrees with Obama on this. And as for DOMA, the federal courts found it unconstitutional. Just because a law is put in place, does not mean it's perfect and should not be scrutinized...

      What isn't addressed about gay marriage?

    • ib radmasters profile image

      ib radmasters 4 years ago from Southern California

      Sandra

      I agree with your hub, but I don't think it even needs the religious reasons.

      Gay marriage doesn't make sense, I have written several hubs on the same sex in the last few days because of the Supreme Court review of the "violation of Equal Protection".

      The rights of the voters are being asked by the gays to be circumvented by the Supreme Court.

      Another 5-4 Decision by the Supreme Court is not going to resolve this issue.

      How can same sex marriage have equality with marriage?

      They talk about rights, and in the same vane as Smoker Rights, they just invoke them.

      Like smoking, same sex is a preference, and not all human preferences are constitutional rights.

      The whole purpose of humans having two genders is solely for procreation, marriage was created to make a family. It protected children born in wedlock.

      Same sex couples cannot procreate, they don't need marriage. They would do better to get civil unions to get the same rights as marriage, but not the validation of their preferences by invading marriage.

      There is nothing equal about same sex marriages and marriage.

      How are two of the same thing equal to a thing composed of two different things.

      And how can two of one thing be equal to two of another thing.

      X+X = 2X

      Y+ Y = 2Y

      X+Y = XY

      So here 2X doesn't even equal 2Y

      BTW where is the equality in the Federal Income Tax System, and it is the use of marriage as a check box that makes the Income Tax System unfair.

      Gay couples have something very different than non gay couples, and they should create their own bonds, instead of invading the existing bonds of marriage.

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 4 years ago from New Zealand

      You talk about this being a religious and partisan issue.

      That's the very reason it's being debated. Your constitution states that all are equal under the law - which they are not at the moment - and that the church and state are to be and remain separated.

      It is unconstitutional to have the religion of some deny the rights of many.

      You are entitled to your beliefs and have a constitutional right to freedom of religion - however your beliefs do not have the right to deny people their rights.

      Think about it - if it was you that was denied the same rights as your peers and was treated as a second class citizen because of something about you that you cannot change (I'm not getting into the 'choice' argument - unless you personally have had a choice to make re your sexuality) - just stop and think about it.

      I find that THAT is the problem - people don't really care unless its their rights that are denied - if they are denying them to others, then it's fine an dandy cause it doesn't affect them. Sigh

    • jdflom profile image

      Jonathan 4 years ago from Sacramento, CA

      ib radmasters: same sex is definitely not a preference. You are highly misinformed if you believe that. No gay person decides to be gay, just like no straight person decides to be straight. I didn't wake up one day and just decide to be straight. I'm attracted to who I'm attracted to, and for gay couples its no different.

      In addition, there are many legal things tied to marriage that a gay couple in a civil union cannot have access to which DOMA has denied.

      Also, while you're very much correct that a same sex couple can't procreate - to use that as logic as for why they can't get married is ridiculous. I know plenty of straight couples married who have no kids and will have no kids. Should they not be allowed to get married? I also know of people who have either married late in life or for some medical reason are unable to have kids; again, should they not be allowed to get married?

      And lastly, marriage was not created for families, it was created as a business transaction between two families. The meaning behind it has been undergoing changes for a long time.

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 4 years ago from New Zealand

      To those who say its a preference or choice - please tell me - when did you make the choice to be straight? Did you just wake up one day and think 'hmmm, from now on I will be attracted to the opposite sex'.

      I ask this for two reasons:

      1 - if you have never made the choice, then why assume it is any different for gay people? Who would choose to be persecuted?

      2 - if you have made the choice, then you have obviously been 'gay' at some point - because that is what you are implying.

    • ib radmasters profile image

      ib radmasters 4 years ago from Southern California

      JD

      "ib radmasters: same sex is definitely not a preference. You are highly misinformed if you believe that. No gay person decides to be gay, just like no straight person decides to be straight. I didn't wake up one day and just decide to be straight. I'm attracted to who I'm attracted to, and for gay couples its no different.

      ib--------------------

      Are you saying it is a genetic defect, if it is not a preference?

      Some people are attracted to animals, not a joke but a fact.

      It is either a biological problem or a preference but in either case it doesn't mean that the country has to satisfy your choice.

      -------------------

      In addition, there are many legal things tied to marriage that a gay couple in a civil union cannot have access to which DOMA has denied.

      ib--------

      You could have gone after making the civil unions with equal rights to marriage, but lifestyle validation is not a right.

      -----------------

      Also, while you're very much correct that a same sex couple can't procreate - to use that as logic as for why they can't get married is ridiculous. I know plenty of straight couples married who have no kids and will have no kids. Should they not be allowed to get married? I also know of people who have either married late in life or for some medical reason are unable to have kids; again, should they not be allowed to get married?

      ib----------------

      The reasons why humans have two genders is strictly for procreation. They don't have to if they don't want to, but they can if they do.--------------

      And lastly, marriage was not created for families, it was created as a business transaction between two families. The meaning behind it has been undergoing changes for a long time."

      ib----------

      You have made no compelling arguments why same sex shouldn't be civil unions only.

      Did you see the equality math, in my previous comment.

      Same sex marriage doesn't equal marriage.

      do the math.

      ==============

    • ib radmasters profile image

      ib radmasters 4 years ago from Southern California

      Jpark

      "To those who say its a preference or choice - please tell me - when did you make the choice to be straight? Did you just wake up one day and think 'hmmm, from now on I will be attracted to the opposite sex'.

      ib------------

      Sexual attraction for the opposite sex is the reason why humans have two genders. The whole biological differences between male and female is based on procreation.

      Same sex attraction is a biological departure from the reason we have two genders. I cannot stress this enough, as it seems to be difficult for some people to understand.

      ----------------

      I ask this for two reasons:

      1 - if you have never made the choice, then why assume it is any different for gay people? Who would choose to be persecuted?

      ib---------

      The difference is an anomaly to human biology. Pedophiles also have an anomaly so should the mores of the country be subject to the anomalies or the normal?

      =================

      2 - if you have made the choice, then you have obviously been 'gay' at some point - because that is what you are implying."

      ib---------

      How does that even make sense, and how do you explain bisexuals?

      ----------------------

      If you want a same sex bonding, then why isn't civil unions OK, instead of forcing your way into marriage. Spend the political power and wealth of the LGBT that is tearing into marriage, to instead make civil unions have the same legal rights as marriage.

      I don't see the basis for your self proclaimed Constitutional Rights.

      Blacks have race is a right

      Old people have age as a right

      Women have gender as a right

      Handicapped people have a disability as a right

      same sex marriage ????? as a right

    • ib radmasters profile image

      ib radmasters 4 years ago from Southern California

      Sandra

      My apology to you for commandeering your hub.

      I have plenty of hubs on this subject, if they want more details.

      So thanks for the hospitality.

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 4 years ago from New Zealand

      Ib - in two seperate comments just moments apart you say two completely different things about sexuality - that it's a preference (and therefore a 'choice'), then that it's biological. Biological would mean that it is NOT a choice. So, one if not both of your arguments fall flat - because you contradicted yourself.

      As a hubber you seem fixated on the fact that there are two genders for a reason - that being procreation. Yet, when questioned about whether infertile couples or couples who intend NOT to procreate should be allowed to get married, you skip the question.

      If your sole reasoning for no same sex marriage is that a SS marriage cannot procreate, then you should be fighting to outlaw those two as well.

      By the way - we can procreate. I may even be living proof of that today (Two week wait for a preg test) - I'm gay, but I've got all the right bits and pieces to make and carry a child to term, and I intend to. Gay men also have all the right bits and pieces to do so also - and many choose to.

      Before you say - ah, but they are not DNA-related. You don't know that. They could use the sibling of one of the couple and the sperm of the other, or the sperm could be a donation from a male sibling of a hlaf of a lesbian couple. This is EXACTLY the same OPTIONS available to people who need to use donor eggs/sperm to conceive in a heterosexual but partially infertile couple (partially being it's all on one person's side), and is frequently used. And besides, if the other half (being of a straight or gay couple) doesn't mind that the child is not genetically related, why do you?

      I'm not trying to be disrespectful, even when I'm likened to a paedophile or my sexuality is likened to beastiality. BTW - paedos are mostly straight, and attracted to CHILDREN not gender.

      I asked a simple question of everyone - WHEN did you choose? Because in order to STATE, in no uncertain terms, that it is a preference/choice - you have to had made that choice.

      BTW - Bisexuals are equally attracted to both genders - they do not need to make a choice as to who they are attracted to, just as gay and straight people are attracted to the ONE gender. So, I don't need to explain them - they just are.

      Sandra - my apologies also, but I needed to ask the question.

    • ib radmasters profile image

      ib radmasters 4 years ago from Southern California

      JPark

      If you want to continue it will have to be on my hubs.

      You are wasting your illogical comments here.

      For example

      I asked whether it was preference, or genetic defect.

      Yes you can carry a baby but not from your partner. Same sex cannot PROCREATE.

      You make no compelling arguments.

      You failed the math test that I asked you to take.

      bye

    • Sandra Remilien profile image
      Author

      Sandra Remilien 4 years ago

      I predict that the next issue before the Supreme Court will be abortion. North Dakota just passed three abortion laws. Residents cannot have an abortion once the fetus has a heart beat. Also, doctors who give abortions will be fined and imprisoned.

    • Marquis profile image

      Marquis 4 years ago from Ann Arbor, MI

      This was a good article to read Sandra. I am also against same-sexed couples. Marriage is between a man and woman. Nothing more or less should be implied.

      America endorsing sodomy will be her down fall. Hopefully people will wake up before God condemns the entire nation.

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 4 years ago from New Zealand

      America's founding came about due to the founding fathers escaping their home land and it's lack of freedom of religion (eg you are of ONE religion, nothing more). So it was founded on freedom of religion - the choice to worship (or not) as you wish.

      So, is it only me that finds it absurd that people whose country was founded on freedom of religion, are now using those freedoms to deny others???

    • Sandra Remilien profile image
      Author

      Sandra Remilien 4 years ago

      Jlpark: There are many books and DVDs about the faith of the founding fathers. Here are two of them:

      1. Faith & Freedom: The Founding Fathers in Their Own Words by Robert Gingrich

      2. 10 Truths About America's Christian Heritage by Truth In Action Ministries (DVD)

    • jlpark profile image

      Jacqui 4 years ago from New Zealand

      But the premise still stands - it was founded for freedom of and from religion - so why are people using those freedoms to deny others?

      It was also given a constitution to protect said freedoms - the separation of church and state. Therefore your church or anyone's should have nothing to do with the creation of law - again - the use of your 'freedoms' are infringing on the freedoms of others.

      Any DVDs that AREN'T produced by religious groups? Unbiased DVDs? Giving me two titles from religious groups does not help your argument - of course they'd say its Christian.

      But it doesn't change anything - regardless of the faith of the founding fathers - they had the FORETHOUGHT to put protections for everyone into the constitution due to the hell they went through for their own freedoms in their home land.

      Why are you trying to go against all that they did by trying to use religion to change laws (against the separation of church an state) and assuming that America is one religion (against freedom of and from religion)

      Note - by 'you' I mean anyone who tries to say gay marriage shouldn't be legalised because God doesn't like it (apparently)

      If I as a New Zealander can see this, why is it not so obvious to those who actually have these freedoms?

    • Sandra Remilien profile image
      Author

      Sandra Remilien 4 years ago

      These are not the only resources. You can research and find them information about the Christian roots of America your own and just because they are written and produced by religious groups, it does not mean that they are false.

      Let me remind you that the Defense of Marriage Act was signed by former President Bill Clinton in 1996. That was over 10 years ago and President Bush did not have any problem with it after two terms in office.

    Click to Rate This Article