General Discussion

Lex

(34,108 posts)

33. Umm, no, sorry that's not true.

Fri May 11, 2012, 07:21 PM

May 2012

It's been well-known since DOMA passed that the Full Faith and Credit Clause has very much to do with this topic.

Since 1996, legal experts and political leaders have debated the constitutionality of DOMA. Some have argued that it clearly violates the "full faith and credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution, which reads, "Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof."

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/gay_marriage/act.html

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

43 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Apologies for the source [View all] morningfog May 2012 OP

Haters gonna hate Capt. Obvious May 2012 #1

+1 n/t 11 Bravo May 2012 #4

I don't know about this author, but I am no hater. morningfog May 2012 #9

Yes, they are...nt SidDithers May 2012 #21

Gay Marriage Moves Closer to Supreme Court Tx4obama May 2012 #2

It seem like every poster in this threads disagrees with Obama. morningfog May 2012 #6

Federal Powers are Enumerated. Period. DevonRex May 2012 #12

And Obama could order the DOJ to join challenges to Prop 8 and others. morningfog May 2012 #19

OR you can do what he did, which is provide the BASIS for its overturning. DevonRex May 2012 #22

Wait a minute SunsetDreams May 2012 #27

The Supreme Court can overrule the state's laws. Tx4obama May 2012 #14

Exactly, and he could lend the DOJ and the federal resources and support to challenging the laws. morningfog May 2012 #20

Obama and his justice dept provided the fucking BASIS for overturning Prop 8. DevonRex May 2012 #23

. SunsetDreams May 2012 #28

Complete mis-characterization and wrong conclusions. DevonRex May 2012 #3

Section 3 of DOMA is enforced, just not defended. morningfog May 2012 #7

DOMA is headed to the Supreme Court. n/t Tx4obama May 2012 #16

All steps in the right direction bhikkhu May 2012 #5

maybe so ibegurpard May 2012 #8

Indeed. I think this marks an end to a POTUS ever being against marriage equality. morningfog May 2012 #11

First of all ProSense May 2012 #10

Character assassination notwithstanding, he makes good points. morningfog May 2012 #13

No he doesn't. n/t ProSense May 2012 #15

Fuck no he does NOT. He's a RW hater who does NOT want to overturn DOMA. nt DevonRex May 2012 #18

To you maybe. Ikonoklast May 2012 #24

I don't take my points from a right wing hack or blog SunsetDreams May 2012 #26

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!1 DevonRex May 2012 #17

bitch if he does, bitch if he doesn't. bitch, bitch, bitch spanone May 2012 #25

Here .... you might need this ... JoePhilly May 2012 #29

not necessarily correct dsc May 2012 #30

If an OPPOSITE sex marriage takes place in any state, it is recognized in ALL states Lex May 2012 #31

The full faith and credit clause has to do with DevonRex May 2012 #32

Umm, no, sorry that's not true. Lex May 2012 #33

Of course it has to DO with this topic. But not for the reason DevonRex May 2012 #34

In the summary Lex May 2012 #39

Isn't it beautiful? We know this is where it's going and we'll get to see it in our lifetime. DevonRex May 2012 #43

Not in all cases. Kaleva May 2012 #36

If you meet the minimum age requirements in SC, you are still married Lex May 2012 #37

You appear to be correct. My mistake. Kaleva May 2012 #38

Who is jonathan alder? Why should I care what he says? "sexual preference"? Really? (edited) Cerridwen May 2012 #35

Seriously. He apparently DevonRex May 2012 #40

And, he's an "environmental" lawyer arguing for private property and Cerridwen May 2012 #41

Thank you for the edit. Cerridwen May 2012 #42