I am a social conservative who has not commented on this board for sometime, but feel that today's news I am glad that a step has been made to provide equal standing before the law. My personal beliefs are ones that I should be able to hold without the enforcement of law upon myself or anyone else. Everyone else should also have the same freedom without having a personal belief system enforced by the civil authority.
I look forward to the defeat of DOMA next.
The safest way to get rid of this law on a more permanent basis is to get it struck down by the supreme court.
If Obama stops enforcing it by executive order, congress can impeach him for failure to perform his executive duty in enforcing laws enacted by congress and the next president can simply reinstate it. Back to square one.
If Congress repeals the law, it can be passed again. Back to square one.
The best and thing that the president can do to have a long term impact is to continue to have the DOJ appeal it to the supreme court.
I am told by some in the know that the WH strategy on this is to first try and get the courts to strike it down. If that doesn't work, then they will push to pass through congress as a less desirable strategy.
Things are going well, thank-you. Let's hope we get a permanent end to DADT and DOMA soon, regardless of how it gets done.
I want to see a a permanent end to DADT. That beign said, I want to see the DOJ appeal this as I believe that the higher courts will also uphold the ruling and the higher the court to do so, the less likely DADT will be able to stand and it will be better legal precedent as to the unconstitutionality of DADT.
Actually, someone correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand how our government works, a decision by the supreme court against DADT would carry more permanent weight agains the measure than simply defeating it in congress. The law overturned by congress can be voted back in just as easily.
I think that I am more in favor of the Justice Department appealing the recent Lower courts ruling agains DADT to force it up eventually to the supreme court. Unless I am mistaken in how this works, it seems like a better long term solution to the matter. Even if the Supreme court ruled in favor of DADT (which I doubt) then the move could be made to overturn it in congress as an alternative.
Would like to hear comments on this
Actually, someone correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand how our government works, a decision by the supreme court against DADT would carry more permanent weight agains the measure than simply defeating it in congress. The law overturned by congress can be voted back in just as easily.
I think that I am more in favor of the Justice Department appealing the recent Lower courts ruling agains DADT to force it up eventually to the supreme court. Unless I am mistaken in how this works, it seems like a better long term solution to the matter. Even if the Supreme court ruled in favor of DADT (which I doubt) then the move could be made to overturn it in congress as an alternative.
Would like to hear comments on this
Chris makes a very valid point. Removing DADT, as onerous as it is isn't enough. Without the law in place, the commander-in-chief can set policy as to the service of gay soldiers. However, without the protection of law to require those rights to serve, another president can return to discrimmination.
Very busy, I'm still checking in on site regularly...I just don't have the time to comment as much...fortunately business has been growing
This is the same group that wants government out of peoples private lives, right?
|
15 Actions
|
1 Action
|
|
1 Action
|
|