Obama administration to urge court to overturn gay marriage ban

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Maudine SLC, UT
    March 2, 2013 4:21 p.m.

    @ worf: you appear to have commented on the wrong thread - this discussion is about marriage, not the deficit.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    March 2, 2013 12:59 a.m.

    Counting from one to sixteen trillion would take 534,000 years, and all the commander can do is stress gay marriage?

    Failure is not an option, and let's fix the problem.

    Reduce the debt, and put America back to work.

  • Maudine SLC, UT
    March 1, 2013 8:28 p.m.

    If you all didn't want the Government spending time in this, you shouldn't have passed unconstitutional laws limiting the rights if others.

  • Californian#1@94131 San Francisco, CA
    March 1, 2013 5:04 p.m.

    The government is in disorder, Washington D.C. is dysfunctional, we are hearing dire predictions of thouaands of civil servants facing furlough, public services being cut, our military forces possibly having to protect this country without adequate training or equipment ... and the Obama administration is spending time that we taxpayers pay for, to have its legal counsel put on this act for the Supreme Court.

    If my house caught fire, I'd concentrate on that first and not worry about saving the curtains.

    I hope the ladies and gentlemen of the court still recognize the separation of powera and will not be taken in by Obama's attempt to coerce the judicial branch of our government.

    P.S. We need to pray for the health of the justices currently on the Supreme Court so at least some semblance of balance in philosophies can be kept. At least pray that they will last four more years.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    March 1, 2013 3:46 p.m.

    I guess a man who would take over a billion dollars of tax payer money for vacations, and constant campaign trips, would come with something like this.

  • amazondoc USA, TN
    March 1, 2013 1:38 a.m.

    Some further info I just found on the net about amicus briefs filed on the Prop 8 case --

    1. there are now more than **100** signatures from prominent Republicans on the pro-gay-marriage amicus brief that I mentioned earlier. The number of Republican signers continues to grow.

    2. More than 200 companies -- including some of the largest in the country -- have now filed their own amicus brief in favor of gay marriage. The brief states, in part, that DOMA “puts us, as employers, to unnecessary cost and administrative complexity.” and "especially because contradictory laws in different states complicate the administration of benefits for multi-state companies". These companies are forced to have two separate systems for tax withholding and payroll -- one for straight employees and another for gay employees -- because of DOMA. And we already know that "separate" is not "equal"!

    The brief also states that DOMA “forces us to treat one class of our lawfully married employees differently than another, when our success depends upon the welfare and morale of all employees” and argues that discrimination undermines their business performance.

  • amazondoc USA, TN
    March 1, 2013 12:10 a.m.

    Just a coupla days ago, on Feb. 26, the New York Times reported that **75** prominent REPUBLICANS have filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in FAVOR of gay marriage.

    As reported in that article:

    "The Proposition 8 case already has a powerful conservative supporter: Theodore B. Olson, the former solicitor general under Mr. Bush and one of the suit’s two lead lawyers. The amicus, or friend-of-the-court, brief is being filed with Mr. Olson’s blessing. It argues, as he does, that same-sex marriage promotes family values by allowing children of gay couples to grow up in two-parent homes, and that it advances conservative values of “limited government and maximizing individual freedom."

    "Legal analysts said the brief had the potential to sway conservative justices as much for the prominent names attached to it as for its legal arguments. The list of signers includes a string of Republican officials and influential thinkers — 75 as of Monday evening — who are not ordinarily associated with gay rights advocacy, including some who are speaking out for the first time and others who have changed their previous positions. " (NYT, dateline 2/25/13)

  • I Bleed Blue Las Vegas, NV
    Feb. 28, 2013 7:32 p.m.

    I'm glad we have time to worry about this and gun control. Hey Mr. President and congress GET A BUDGET DONE. DO YOUR JOB! Quit the dog and pony shows on issues that go nowhere. We are not distracted!

  • George Bronx, NY
    Feb. 28, 2013 7:34 p.m.


    By who's definition, why do you get to dictate what the definition of marriage is?

  • Dubai Holladay Dubai, UAE, 00
    Feb. 28, 2013 6:47 p.m.

    It's time to move forward and not back, it's the right thing to do. Some might not like it, but many people have disliked many thing as we have moved forward as a society. Marriage is marriage, two people in love is all that matters.

  • Maudine SLC, UT
    Feb. 28, 2013 6:39 p.m.

    @ Chris B.: On what grounds should it be illegal?

  • DRay Roy, UT
    Feb. 28, 2013 6:03 p.m.

    There is no more discrimination towards Gays as pertains to marriage than there is to not allowing women into the men's room. If you read the sign, by definition that is so, and so is marriage, it being defined as between a man and a woman. There's no discrimination here, just clarity of boundaries that give order and peace to mankind.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 28, 2013 2:38 p.m.

    I'm not Mormon, but I'm with Mormon Prophet Monson on this one.

    He thinks it should be illegal. In addition to being wrong, he also thinks it should be illegal.

    I'm with you Prophet Monson!