Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Effectively meaning it will be repealed in court soon.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/us/24marriage.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=marriage&st=cse

Go Obama!

How will this allow it to be repealed in court?

Originally posted by King Kandy
Effectively meaning it will be repealed in court soon.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/us/24marriage.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=marriage&st=cse

Go Obama!

I could have sworn I posted about this to my long-ass diatribes to SkeUng.


Anyway, yeah, I was glad to see that happen, too.

Isn't the precedent of a President simply ignoring a law sort of a bad thing, too?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Isn't the precedent of a President simply ignoring a law sort of a bad thing, too?

Hmmm. Maybe.

He has told the Justice department to stop defending it. That's type of action has been around far longer than Obama.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Isn't the precedent of a President simply ignoring a law sort of a bad thing, too?

When you're making a delicious, non-prejudiced omlet, you have to brake some eggs.

And by omlet I mean country.

And by eggs I mean laws.

I am the King of Metaphors. It is me.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Isn't the precedent of a President simply ignoring a law sort of a bad thing, too?
It's always part of the executive branch's jurisdiction to enforce laws; these are the kind of powers it has available to it. And he isn't "ignoring" the law (the executive branch will NOT be allowing gay marriage, as the law still is in force). They have no obligation to agree with the congress, just to enforce their laws.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I could have sworn I posted about this to my long-ass diatribes to SkeUng.


Anyway, yeah, I was glad to see that happen, too.

Which long ass diatribe would that be?

Originally posted by skekUng
Which long ass diatribe would that be?

Which one, indeed. I lost track of them.