Monday, August 17, 2009

The Obama administration thinks we make good parents!

The Obama administration is defending DOMA in the litigation challenging it filed in California. No surprise there.

Today they filed a brief in the case, and there is some good news in it. I'm going to let it speak for itself.

"The government does not contend that there are legitimate government interests in "creating a legal structure that promotes the raising of children by both of their biological parents" or that the government's interest in "responsible procreation" justifies Congress's decision to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Since DOMA was enacted, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Medical Association, and the Child Welfare League of America have issued policies opposing restrictions on lesbian and gay parenting because they concluded, based on numerous studies, that children raised by gay and lesbian parents are as likely to be well-adjusted as children raised by heterosexual parents.

Furthermore, in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 605 (2003), Justice Scalia acknowledged in his dissent that encouraging procreation would not be a rational basis for limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples under the reasoning of the Lawrence majority opinion – which, of course, is the prevailing law – because "the sterile and the elderly are allowed to marry."

For these reasons, the United States does not believe that DOMA is rationally related to any legitimate government interests in procreation and child-rearing and is therefore not relying upon any such interests to defend DOMA's constitutionality."

The bases that the Justice Department repudiates here are the ones state courts have relied on to rule against plaintiffs seeking the right to marry under state constitutional law.

1 comment:

Michael said...

PROOF for human rights violations against hetero married couples:
1. the gay couple will never have to agonize over family planning, or the side effects of drugs.
2. the gay couple will never have to agonize over sterilization
3. the gay couple will never have to agonize over abortion
4. the gay couple will never have to have an untimely birth, and when they want one, there would be money in the house.
5. the gay couple, through adoption, has control of choice in: sex selection, race, appearance, motor, psych and mental skills. They are not obligated to choose a disabled child because they do not birth any.
6. the gay couple will be less likely to have to experience debt, as the burden of educating and raising children, while keeping them safe and healthy.
The agony that homosexuals have to deal with regarding their orientation is no more nor no less than the agonies hetero married couples must face in life. Gays want all the joys, none of the sorrow: heteros always will have BOTH. You call that fair? In fact it is a human rights violation, HAVING NOTHING TO DO W/RELIGION. Oh, and dare I ask if it is fair for the gay married woman to have the magic right to look her same lovely self after getting a child in comparison to the trainwreck heteros wives look like after going through the PAINS of birth, which the oh so privileged and newly endowed gay married woman does not have to endure. Nor the fact that she might have to have her belly opened, uterus exposed, for a child to come out, and pay $12G for that RIGHT? Wow, what a privilege! Which hetero married woman WOULDN'T give her right ovary to have a painless birth, look like a princess immediately afterward, cost nothing, and can even take part in CHOOSING a perfectly cute, non-disabled, right sexed, perfectly TIMED baaaaaby? Only the elite of the elite! The gay married class, who simply must regard that stupid breeder class of getting nothing right! C'mon now Nancy, be a good lawyer. You can show a little compassion for those who actually have to laboriously WORK at marriage on ALL these tiring issues that gay married couples don't face.