Comments on: Real Life …

By: Bryan

Bryan — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 04:10:51 +0000

Well, since that is the primary lie told by the caller, and it has spread to the other side of “the pond” this must be a News Corp approved lie.

Of course, most people are totally unaware that the Federal government has almost nothing to do with marriage. Even the marriages performed in the chapels on military bases are recorded by the state or country in which the base is located, not with the Federal government.

Badtux, with two cats and working on your own vehicle, you are practically a one bird crime wave in California. 😉

By: Badtux

Badtux — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 01:51:26 +0000

Besides, Duffers, yes, in the United States prosecutors regularly make judgements as to whether to waste their time prosecuting a particular infringement of the law or not. Given that if you stacked up all the laws in the United States the stack of laws would likely reach most of the way to the Moon, the majority of us are likely in violation of some law just by breathing. So if prosecutors did not have such discretion, there would be more people in prison than out of prison, which clearly isn’t workable.

But with DOMA the notion of Obama not enforcing the law is ridiculous on its face because there’s nothing for Obama to enforce in the first place. DOMA basically says that gay marriages in one state aren’t required to be recognized in other states (states can *choose* to recognize gay marriages from another state, but they don’t have to) and the IRS can’t treat gay marriage as marriage for tax purposes. That’s pretty much it. In short, it’s a list of things for government to *NOT* do, things which they, err, aren’t doing. In short, Obama cannot choose to enforce or not enforce DOMA, because enforcing nothing is, err, nothing.

– Badtux the Snarky Penguin

By: Steve Bates

Steve Bates — Fri, 04 Mar 2011 12:59:04 +0000

I tire of replying to absolute IDIOTS, but I suppose it must be done. The Obama administration IS enforcing DOMA. What they are not doing is defending it in court when it is challenged. If you don't understand that distinction, Duffy, maybe you don't know enough to be inserting your prick, or is that your head, into this matter. It is the Obama administration's belief that the law is likely unconstitutional, but it is the job of the courts in our system to make that determination. At some point that will happen: a federal court will probably rule in the context of an actual case that the law is unconstitutional. Obama is merely announcing that such a ruling will not be appealed. Ignorance and arrogance are a truly deplorable combination, Duffy. Maybe, when you don't understand something, you should just STFU.