Bill To Repeal Gay Marriage Ban DOMA To Be Introduced Wednesday

Mar 14, 2011 | Posted by: Rick in Kansas | Full story: www.ontopmag.com

New York Representative Jerrold Nadler will reintroduce legislation that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act on Wednesday.

Comments
1 - 10 of 10 Comments Last updated Mar 14, 2011
Frank Stanton

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Mar 14, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

1

good luck jerrold.

but this will die.

ameriKKKa hates it's own gay citizens.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Mar 14, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Change takes time, Frank. We keep trying, just like we did with Matthew Shepard.

Since: Jan 07

Ann Arbor, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Mar 14, 2011
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Why bother? This will never pass a Republican House, and they know it. We're supposed to believe they chose to do it now because Obama has decided not to defend the bill? Or is it just a cynical gesture to court the gay vote, since they already know it will be DOA?

If I vote for Democrats in the next election, it will be because they aren't opposed by a viable third party candidate or because the choice on the Republican side (and the net effect of having Republicans in a majority) stands as a worse proposition.

It definitely won't be due to Democrats politically convenient 'advocacy'.

Since: Mar 11

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Mar 14, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

One has to wonder "why" this is being introduced now..instead of before the elections last November.

Does the Congressman really think he has the votes? or is this simply a political maneuver.. there is a third possibility and thats to see how much public support in the house is for equality and which members are on the fence..

It would be a wonderful thing if this measure grew with bi-partisan support, but somehow i fear the demise of DOMA will have to come at the hands of the 9 in robes..

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Mar 14, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I would expect quicker results from SCOTUS than the legislature. What just happened in Maryland is a good example of why.

I do welcome the bill though. It will get more air time and help more people to see just how bigoted DOMA is. It may help change a few more minds.

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Mar 14, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

JustthatitismyOpinion wrote:
One has to wonder "why" this is being introduced now..instead of before the elections last November.
Does the Congressman really think he has the votes? or is this simply a political maneuver.. there is a third possibility and thats to see how much public support in the house is for equality and which members are on the fence..
It would be a wonderful thing if this measure grew with bi-partisan support, but somehow i fear the demise of DOMA will have to come at the hands of the 9 in robes..
Not that I would excuse the inaction in most of the first 2 years of Obama's term, but since they waited until the 11th hour to repeal DADT, which had far more support, I don't see how they would also have gone for DOMA. The repeal of DADT would have probably failed if they had tried.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Mar 14, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

1

JustthatitismyOpinion wrote:
One has to wonder "why" this is being introduced now..instead of before the elections last November.
Does the Congressman really think he has the votes? or is this simply a political maneuver.. there is a third possibility and thats to see how much public support in the house is for equality and which members are on the fence..
It would be a wonderful thing if this measure grew with bi-partisan support, but somehow i fear the demise of DOMA will have to come at the hands of the 9 in robes..
Actually it WAS introduced last year and got something like 105 cosponsors, but it died in the House because there was no companion bill introduced in the Senate.

Why are they doing it now? Pure politics. They are hoping to emphasize the GOP opposition to gay rights. The GOP said if Obama was opposed to DOMA he should try to repeal it instead of dropping the court defense; so in come the Dems with a bill to do just that.

Smart move by the Dems.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Mar 14, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Inquisitarian wrote:
Why bother? This will never pass a Republican House, and they know it. We're supposed to believe they chose to do it now because Obama has decided not to defend the bill? Or is it just a cynical gesture to court the gay vote, since they already know it will be DOA?
If I vote for Democrats in the next election, it will be because they aren't opposed by a viable third party candidate or because the choice on the Republican side (and the net effect of having Republicans in a majority) stands as a worse proposition.
It definitely won't be due to Democrats politically convenient 'advocacy'.
Ginsberg- 83 y/o in 2016, average life expectancy- 80.
Scalia- 80 y/o in 2016, average life expectancy- 75.
Kennedy- 80 y/o in 2016 average life expectancy- 75.
Breyer- 78 y/o in 2016 average life expectancy- 75.
Thomas- 68 y/o in 2016 average life expectancy- 65.

Any questions?

Since: Mar 11

Altadena, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Mar 14, 2011
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Pure politics. They are hoping to emphasize the GOP opposition to gay rights.
I think your are correct...

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Mar 14, 2011
 
Ron431 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not that I would excuse the inaction in most of the first 2 years of Obama's term, but since they waited until the 11th hour to repeal DADT, which had far more support, I don't see how they would also have gone for DOMA. The repeal of DADT would have probably failed if they had tried.
Exactly. The gay advocacy groups got together with the politicians and agreed that only one issue could be pushed at a time. First up was Matthew Shepard. Then DADT was the next fight they thought they could win.

You can spin yourself crazy wondering whether they could or should have moved faster and accomplished more. But the fact is this is much more than has ever been accomplished before. Clinton tried to repeal the military ban, and we ended up having DADT shoved down our throats by whopping majorities of both parties.(Thank you, Sam Nunn!) Clinton couldn't join the crowd fast enough in signing DOMA. And Clinton couldn't get a hate crimes bill through while images of Matthew Shepard and James Byrd were fresh in our minds.

Oh, and all you Hillary fans: She always seemed more socially conservative than her husband, up until 2008.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Jerrold Nadler Discussions

Search the Jerrold Nadler Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
DHS Sec: Don't Enforce Immigration Law In Court... May '14 Amigo 3
If Conyers Leaves Congress, Fight For Top Judic... May '14 Monty Anaconda 3
Which love comes first: Spouse or country? (Apr '09) Jan '14 wildwoman 981
Fast-food workers in NYC stage strikes, rallies (Jul '13) Aug '13 Aphelion 571
Fast-food workers in NYC stage strikes, rallies (Aug '13) Aug '13 Tammy 1
President Obama Urges Respect for Zimmerman Acq... (Jul '13) Jul '13 LetsGetBackToNSA Spying 3
Weiner faces growing calls to quit mayoral bid ... (Jul '13) Jul '13 Woman to Woman 4
•••
•••