Obama: DOMA Should Be Repealed, Lawyers Looking At 'Range Of Options'

[kpete]

Source: Talking Points Memo

Obama: DOMA Should Be Repealed, Lawyers Looking At 'Range Of Options'
Rachel Slajda | December 22, 2010, 11:10AM

President Obama, although he still supports civil unions over same-sex marriage, said yesterday that he believes the Defense of Marriage Act should be repealed.

"Repealing DOMA, getting ENDA a bill to protect LGBT people from discrimination done, those are things that should be done," Obama told The Advocate the night before signing Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal into law. "I think those are natural next steps legislatively. I'll be frank with you, I think that's not going to get done in two years. We're on a three- or four-year time frame unless there's a real transformation of attitudes within the Republican caucus."

...............

"I have a whole bunch of really smart lawyers who are looking at a whole range of options," Obama said. "My preference wherever possible is to get things done legislatively because I think it gains a legitimacy, even among people who don't like the change, that is valuable."

"So with 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' I have such great confidence in the effective implementation of this law because it was repealed . We would have gotten to the same place if the court order had made it happen, but I think it would have engendered resistance," he added. "So I'm always looking for a way to get it done if possible through our elected representatives. That may not be possible in DOMA's case. That's something that I think we have to strategize on over the next several months."

Read more: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/obama-doma-should-be-repealed-lawyers-looking-at-whole-range-of-options.php?ref=fpblg

[t0dd]

1. What cheap political maneuvering

"I'm wrestling with this. My attitudes are evolving on this. I have always firmly believed in having a robust civil union that provides the rights and benefits under the law that marriage does," he said.

Were you wrestling with it in the mid-90s when you declared your support for same-sex marriage, or when people actually started knowing about you? I'm willing to bet in 2013, if he is re-elected, he'll come out in support of it.

[Fearless]

8. +1

[BenzoDia]

10. Agree.

[Egnever]

31. yes cause it would be so much better if he just said screw getting relected

No one wants doma ended anyway might as well just scream loudly and get nothing sdone and screw the folks that dont get helped on this when i dont get re elected.

That would work out so well.

[emulatorloo]

33. DU has lost its mind.

[t0dd]

34. Your unlettered use of sarcasm only sidesteps my point

I was commenting on the callousness of our political system and calling out our President for routinely being a pawn of it; that politicians, when human rights are involved, have to waver and rely on polls to decide moral issues is despicable. Our President is unprincipled for relying on this to get re-elected, and he should be aware of how illogical his meandering views on this topic are. With that said, I certainly appreciate the marvelous non-sequitur of your response: moving from the premise of President Obama being politically cheap in holding an unjustifiable, backward position on same-sex marriage to "no one wants doma ended anyway" certainly requires a tremendous amount of creative reasoning.

[emulatorloo]

35. I think you are doing a Bill Frist-style TV diagnosis of Obama

Remember when Bill First watched those videos of Terry Schiavo and "diagnosed" her?

I think you are projecting a lot of negative motives onto Obama, and creating this Evil Obama figure for what reason I don't know.

To me it always seemed logical that this stuff had to be done one step at a time. Get DADT repeal done. DOMA next.

[t0dd]

36. To cite an example: In what way was it necessary for President Obama

to announce the same day Iowa legalized same-sex marriage that he still prefers civil unions? Why was it necessary for him to undermine such an enormous victory by reminding gay couples he considers them second-class citizens that deserve separate-but-equal status? Did such a reminder really benefit his interests, by affirming his belief in the sanctity of marriage, or was it solely a political reaction? Cite a hundred other issues where he has behaved the same way, ad infinium.

I'm sorry, but he himself enables the negativity that is projected on him; and, without too much diagnosis on my part, it would seem a fierce advocate would not behave such a way. And it's fine. He isn't particularly interested in gay rights. This signing of DADT, that only passed, let's be honest, thanks to grassroots activism from groups like GetEQUAL and people like Dan Choi, and the mentioning of DOMA, are now political fodder to quell the base for giving more tax breaks to the rich. But such deception deserves, in fact requires, criticism, and I won't withhold my comments because of your inane Bill Frist analogies.

[emulatorloo]

43. "DADT [repeal was} political fodder to quell the base for giving more tax breaks to the rich"

I dunno, you are not helping your credibility here.

[t0dd]

45. Nice job leaving out the "mentioning DOMA" part.

And you aren't helping your credibility by not responding to any of my points. I guess because you have none of your own.

[sirthomas66]

48. That's exactly what it was. There is not even any doubt about

that.

[Kweli4Real]

38. I believe you are correct ...

First, we desegregated the military; then desegregated (somewhat) the rest of society. It's a model that worked.

[BenzoDia]

37. I understand why he's stating this as his position.

I do believe it is counter to what he actually believes.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

41. Who cares what he thinks as long as he repeals the damn thing.

All the more reason why we need to stop behaving like his enemy and keep pushing him on this and other issues we care about.

We all are on the same side, but the Repukes love it when we are not united.

Let's not make them happy, please.

[t0dd]

46. Umm, Californian gay couples probably care.

Seeing as how a flyer touting his opposition to same-sex marriage was distributed a few weeks before Proposition 8 passed. I imagine that made a difference. Had he taken our side, maybe more Democrats would have seen it as the right thing to do and voted against it; who knows? that might have given it the edge to pass.

We are not on the same side. I am not on the side of a President that caters legislation to corporate interests and thinks gay couples deserve anything less than full marriage equality.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

47. OK. Whatever. Do whatever you want to do. Continue on with the defeatist attitude

Good luck to you.

[SidDithers]

2. K&R...nt

Sid

[AllyCat]

3. The corporate powers will probably allow DOMA to end

as it would allow them to make money on more weddings besides heterosexual ones. ENDA they won't like because they are never for helping workers.

[Richardo]

7. Same note, different thread

Again, if Corporate America makes out so well by repeal, why did they let it go into effect in the first place?

[AlbertCat]

12. The corporate powers will probably allow DOMA to end

It will provide great cover for other egregious horrible things.... like the repeal of DADT did for the tax giveaway to the rich and beginning of the destruction of SS.

[snooper2]

15. You guys are REALLY good at this...

I do have to give you some props..you stay right track...

:thumbsup:

[No Elephants]

20. Which big businesses make money on weddings?

[FiveGoodMen]

24. That's my thinking as well.

They'll trade away something they don't care about and get something they shouldn't have in return.

[Schema Thing]

44. stop using the word "they". It's silly.

[cottonseed]

28. Ah. The great De Beers conspiracy.

More marriages, means more diamonds, means more power, means... where's that Glen Beck chart again?

[racaulk]

27. They'll make more money on divorces, too. nt

[struggle4progress]

4. DOMA was intended as a firewall against a constitutional amendment. The situation in the states

still seems generally hostile to samne sex marriage; see map at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States#Constitutional_Amendments

I'd be happy to see DOMA repealed, but I'd really prefer not to have to spend time fighting a backlash effort to enact an anti-gay constitutional amendment, and I'd feel much more comfortable with DOMA repeal if the state-level map were moving in a progressive direction

Of course, since the issue doesn't directly affect me, I'm inclined to follow the lead of people directly affected

[No Elephants]

6. Everyone in D.C. knew amending the U.S. Constitution was never a serious possibility.

No controversial amendment has passed since Eisenhower was President.

Do you think Republicans passed DOMA to avoid an inevitable amendment to the U.S. Constitution, or because they knew an amendment was not a realistic possibility, and therefore a statute was the best they could do?

It is to Clintgon's discredit that he fashioned DADT and had Congress pass it and also that he signed DOMA. Shameful triangulations that he denounced only well after he left office.

[Unvanguard]

11. In 1996, it wouldn't have been all that controversial. Not a chance of happening today, though. n/t

[No Elephants]

17. Sorry, it was VERY controversial. Since the beginning, family matters, like marriage, adoption, etc

were matters of state law EXCLUSIVELY.

When it began to appear that some states might be fixing to recognize gay marriage, Congress enacted DOMA, reversing hundreds of years of federalism, as well as discrriminating against gays in federal law.

No clue where folks on this thread are getting their info.

[Unvanguard]

22. Yet somehow DOMA passed both houses of Congress overwhelmingly anyway.

:shrug:

You substantially overestimate the importance people invest in federalist principles when it comes to their ideological preferences. An FMA in 1996 would have been sold as an anti-gay marriage law, and given how little political support there was for same-sex marriage at the time, it's not at all hard to believe that it could have gotten approval from three-fourths of the states. (Congress almost certainly would have not been a problem.)

[No Elephants]

5. Would you have been accepting of only civil unions for African Americans, Mr. President?

[Gormy Cuss]

49. Or two people of different races. That should only be allowed as a civil union.

Marriage is sacred. That's why the term "marriage" is written into state laws. :sarcasm:

[Tx4obama]

9. We are lucky to have such a great President.

p.s. Thank God - McCain and Palin did not win in 2008 :)

[Unvanguard]

13. He doesn't have any power over same-sex marriage as President, so that is not so urgent for me.

DOMA is a different matter: the cases need to be appealed so they can have national effect, but the DOJ arguing against the law rather than (half-heartedly) for it would be a nice change of pace.

[No Elephants]

21. You don't think the POTUS saying he opposes same gender marriage has any effect?

[Unvanguard]

23. Not really.

I mean, maybe a little on the margin: people often do tend to follow elite cues, so the presence of prominent Democrats who oppose gay marriage gives reluctant Democrats more room to oppose it. But an issue like gay marriage is simple and visceral enough that I doubt that has a major effect. Democrats who oppose same-sex marriage generally do so for religious reasons, and they are not going to abandon those simply because Barack Obama suggests otherwise.

Politicians generally follow public trends; they don't lead them. The Democratic Party will start clearly supporting same-sex marriage when referenda in Democratic states start ending in victories and legislatively-enacted same-sex marriage laws extend beyond the Northeast. This will happen--we are within a few years of it--but it has not happened yet. We are better off trying to work to make it happen than we are hounding President Obama for waiting. He is obviously not going to reverse course at this moment.

[No Elephants]

25. We disagree on the effect of a pronouncement from the POTUS and I disagree on.

This too: "Democrats who oppose same-sex marriage generally do so for religious reasons, and they are not going to abandon those simply because Barack Obama suggests otherwise."

I don't think we can ever know why somone in office opposes something. Nine times out of ten, my money would be on re-election, though.

[Unvanguard]

26. As far as politicians go, your bet is better than mine.

But I'm not talking about politicians, I'm talking about ordinary people--people who self-identify as Democrats and people who generally vote for Democrats.

[emulatorloo]

32. Obama's relentless attack on states that have marriage equality speaks volumes

He is constantly browbeating those states to end marriage equality in every high profile speech he makes. Then there is Organizing For Americas massive ad buy in those state with vicious anti-gay marraige smears are repeated ad infinitum. He is clearly trying to DESTROY marriage equality in those States.

Oh, wait a minute. . . .he isn't doing that. That would be Republicans.

[tomm2thumbs]

14. iow: 'gonna need you to vote for me if you really want this thing...'

or am I stating the obvious?

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jberryhill]

19. That's in fashion EVERY day!

[24601]

29. Soon, there might not be any of Clinton's legacy laws left. n/t

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

30. DMCA DMCA DMCA DMCA DMCA DMCA DMCA DMCA DMCA DMCA DMCA

[iandhr]

39. My prediction is that...

ENDA will get done before the repeal of DOMA

[BlueIris]

40. Reflective of his desperation. Too little, too late, and not nearly enough

to convince me supports equality for all Americans.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

42. From the looks of it, looks like nothing ever will. Obama could announce that he's gay

tomorrow, and DUers would still find a reason not to support this man. He can't win for losing.

Hope the Republican president does a better job for you in 2012.