Prop 8 and another appeal over the federal Defense of Marriage Act will produce blockbuster rulings from the justices in coming months.
February 28th, 2013
12:43 PM ET
7 years ago
Obama faces imminent decision over same-sex marriage
Washington (CNN) - It could be the social issue that defines President Barack Obama's second term legacy: same-sex marriage.
He faces a monumental choice on Thursday over whether to put the force of his office behind the idea that gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry.
FULL STORY
From CNN Politics
- Buttigieg responds to Limbaugh's homophobic remarks: 'I love my husband' February 16, 2020 10:03 pm
- Klobuchar again voices concern about potentially having Sanders at top of Democratic ticket February 16, 2020 06:19 pm
- Democratic candidates zero in on Bloomberg as former mayor rises in the polls February 16, 2020 06:55 pm
- More than 1,100 former prosecutors and other DOJ officials call on Attorney General Bill Barr to resign February 16, 2020 08:32 pm
- Sanders: Bloomberg with 'all his money' will not create the excitement needed to beat Trump February 16, 2020 07:06 pm
- Klobuchar and Steyer couldn't name Mexico's president while campaigning in Nevada February 16, 2020 02:42 am
The cave in Republicans are dropping fast so it won't be long.
Why do you post this nonsense when the WH has already clearly stated that it will be submitting a brief in support of gay marriage? You're clearly rabble rousing, but the administration has stated that it will be filing an amicus brief late today. This is beyond pathetic on your part, CNN.
Obama spent most of his life opposing gay marriage and only changed positions to get the support and money of gays in the 2012 election. Democrats know they will always have the black vote even though most do not support gay marriage, which is why is failed in California. The black vote will never leave the government dependence plantation and then wonder why they are not better off.
This is how I have always understood that it's supposed to work. We elect politicians who, in theory, write the laws and things that would apply to us. The check and balance is the public referendum. We, The People, hold a public referendum that sets laws, limits and rules on the politicians. We use referendums to set school budgets, term limits, property tax rates, et cetera, and that other good stuff that tells politicians how we want them to run the government.
Referendums are not supposed to be used to define the rights, priviliges, or freedoms for a segment of the population. It is not democracy for the majority to define the rights, priviliges and freedoms of the minority. The minority will usually come out on the short end of the stick. That's not how referendums should be used in our democracy.
If I've got it wrong in some way, then please tell me what is correct.
This one is a no brainer. You support it, and punt to the SCOTUS. That's exaclly what the Republicans are doing with their signed letter to the Court. No matter how the SCOTUS rules on these two cases, you can always put your feet up and say, "Well, I supported it. The SCOTUS struck it down."