DOMA Unconstitutional!

Finally. The Supreme Court has acted to reduce the authority of government over private individuals.

The justices issued two 5-4 rulings in their final session of the term. One decision wiped away part of a federal anti-gay marriage law that has kept legally married same-sex couples from receiving tax, health and pension benefits.

The other was a technical legal ruling that said nothing at all about same-sex marriage, but left in place a trial court’s declaration that California’s Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. That outcome probably will allow state officials to order the resumption of same-sex weddings in the nation’s most populous state in about a month.

Look, I know that some of you have strong feelings about gay marriage based on your religious beliefs. You’re entitled to them. I would never say otherwise.

However, as advocates for a limited federal government, you cannot deny that this is a win! Politicians should have NO BUSINESS in people’s personal lives! They should have no business defining a relationship between two people as legitimate or not. And the federal government should have no business telling individuals with whom they can LEGALLY spend the rest of their lives.

It is an intrusion into our most private relationships, and considering how many of these corruptocrats actually lie, cheat and destroy their families, they have no place telling the rest of us how to live!

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: leave marriage to churches. If there’s a church that has a policy of marrying two people of the same gender, more power to them. If not, more power to them as well.  But it should not be up to the voters, the politicians or the bureaucrats to make that decision for us. Once you allow the government – on any level – to dictate what relationship performed in what church is “legitimate,” you allow it into your religion, where it has no business being!

Congrats, gay guys and gals! You can now be as legally miserable as the rest of us!


12 responses

  1. I couldn’t agree MORE with you!

    It’s actually time the Supreme Court throws out a LOT of laws. In fact, the more, the merrier.

    Truth is, individual rights are what this country is ABOUT. Not small groups (or even large groups) trying to tell everyone else what’s good (or bad) for them.

    I own guns. I married a woman (same one twice now, you know vow renewals stuff and all that) and we raised five children together. We have 13 grandchildren.

    I don’t care of the neighbors are gay, black, white, or purple as long as they don’t throw rocks at my house or climb in my hot tub without my permission. But when they start throwing rocks, or get in my face because they want to show off their “gayness” or force me to “accept” it then it becomes another story.

    The color of someone’s skin isn’t and never has been an issue to me. Unless they are breaking and entering. Then, it becomes a bad thing – for them, not me.

    When the others are trying to get me to go to their church, that’s one thing. If they are trying to tell me how deep in Hell I’m going to live when I die because I DIDN’T go to their church, then, there’s a problem.

    When the Purples tell me I have to believe in Global Warming or I’m a hateful, unpatriotic American, well, then they can just take their illegal alien asses back to their own damned planet!

    And anyone, anywhere who tries to tell me I can’t eat meat, eggs, sugar, drink a 32 oz soda if I want, smoke (I don’t actually smoke, never have, never will) or that I CAN’T OWN GUNS can go straight to that depth in hell the others were mentioning.

    As an American, I want to be LEFT the HELL alone. And I’m sure others do.

    If they want that, they ought to start by getting out of every one elses’ faces.


    1. I have decided that since WordPress doesn’t have a “Like” button to show people you like their comments, I’m going to improvise.




        🙂 Thanks.


  2. I 100% agree with you, government has no business being in the marriage business in the first place. If you believe in the Constitution and limited government there are going to be some things that people will do that you don’t agree with.

    You have the right to live your life and be free, I have the right to be free from you.


  3. That’s all well and good until they make it a crime for a church to refuse to marry a gay couple. Or to provide their wedding cake, as a private business owner, or to photograph their wedding. I’m afraid I see trouble brewing soon, as our freedom of religion rights are selectively protected.


    1. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen.


    2. I must agree, Jon. All the DOMA really did was DEFINE what a “marriage” really is…just as Prop 8 did…as a legal union between one man and one woman…period. DOMA also prohibited the government from forcing the various States to recognize a gay “marriage” performed in another State. This decision is merely the left wing of the court telling the American people that laws passed by a majority (you remember the “majority” that the left USUALLY so lionizes) aren’t with any effect if the court disagrees. The destruction of our culture is well on its way.


      1. But it’s not up to the federal government to define what a “marriage” really is. You are missing the point. It is not up to the federal government to define any relationship between consenting adults. Just because you happen to agree with that definition, you seem happy to have the government impose it.


  4. I think that the point at which the government gets involved has to do with things like inheritance laws, regulating insurance coverage and pensions, and that sort of thing. It seems to have worked for a while to allow each state to come up with their own definitions of marriage (which were in agreement for a long long time), and when a citizen of the US moved from state to state, each would reciprocate the recognition of marriage in another state. Can’t recall exactly how Utah was forced to outlaw polygamy, but I think the Feds were involved there in some way – was it by denying them statehood? The question arises, of course, whether marriage should be limited to something between only two consenting adults. No legal reason/justification why the US Government should prefer that now, is there? Why are we discriminating against those Mormons who love each other and want to be married?


    1. A friend of mine said it perfectly. I’ll quote her here.

      The religious portion of a wedding is done in a church. The civil portion is done at the courthouse. The church should set whatever stipulations they deem righteous and appropriate for a ceremony they will bless and sanction. The courthouse, however, needs to be open to all consenting adults. It is public. It should be color blind, gender blind, and free from religious considerations.


  5. Speaking as a gay man, I’m not really interested in same sex marriage. If you’re for it, great. If not, then so what. What does interest me is the fact that DOMA was grotesquely unconstitutional in that it created separate rules for different classes of people; something for which there are many. many legal precedents for shooting down.

    Also, speaking as a gay man who has seen first hand the “love” of God and his followers, you could fucking drag me into a church for any reason, let alone a marriage. I value my continued existence, thank you very much.


%d bloggers like this: