Rate Thread
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
another Federal Appellate Court DOMA Unconstitutional
#1
DOMA ~1996
prez Clinton's contribution to gay rights

another US federal court declares it unconstitutional.
some analysis


refernce:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act
http://www.towleroad.com/2012/05/waldman....html#more
Reply

#2
Clinton at least says he regrets it i guess.
I really hope he was just using it as leverage to pander to social conservatives after his...um....issues in office.
Silly Sarcastic So-and-so
Reply

#3
Genersis Wrote:I really hope he was just using it as leverage to pander to social conservatives after his...um....issues in office.
I think so, other than his infidelity and junk personal life, his term in office was great. The economy was going great when he left, the federal budget was beyond balanced. Bush got in and trashed the country. Funny the American people didnt know how good they and it back then.
Reply

#4
Genersis Wrote:Clinton at least says he regrets it i guess.
I really hope he was just using it as leverage to pander to social conservatives after his...um....issues in office.

1992 Clinton took office. This is 2 decades ago - 20 years.

A lot has changed for LGBT in the past 20 years with the most significant changes taking place in the past decade.

It wouldn't be until 2004 that Massachusetts would be the first state to have Gay Marriage.

DOMA was in trade for DADT. Prior to DADT they (the military) could ask and you had to tell the truth. This meant that they could (and did) screen out homosexuals just by asking 'Are you Gay?' - If you lied and it came out you faced criminal charges. If you told the truth they gave you a dishonorable discharge.

Regan set some precedence while in office, he totally ignored HIV/AIDS. His predecessor did very little (Bush Sr). When Clinton took office getting DADT was actually a huge barrier breaker - for its time. It was a 'good trade' with Defense of Marriage Act after all no one in the 1990's would dare to dream that gay marriage was possible, and too no one dared to dream there would be a black president either.

Also understand the position of the public. At the time less than 30% of Americans were in support of LGBT rights of any kind. Unlike today where there may be a minor majority - some reporting as high as 55% are in favor of any gay rights with about 50% in favor of gay marriage.

The Early 1990's when Clinton took office were not as 'tolerant' to gays as this second decade of the 21st century is turning out to be.

For any politician to admit that they supported Gay Marriage in the 1990's was a kill shot to their political career. He was in his first term and if he wanted a second term as president he had to cow-tow to 'traditional' and social pressures of the time.

Clinton signed into law DADT and that started early in his first term (around 1993) DADT was a first term action, he took office in 1992.

While Don't Ask, Don't tell sounds like a stupid thing (it is), the reality is that it set the ground work for a lot of other federal 'tolerance' in matters of LGBT. It was intended as stepping stone to open gay service in the military which is what Clinton wanted at that time. It was a compromise which 19 years later was over turned and now we have openly serving LGBT in the armed forces.

DOMA is also a stepping stone, which will be over turned - eventually. Politics and civil laws are a process.
Reply

#5
Bowyn Aerrow Wrote:1992 Clinton took office. This is 2 decades ago - 20 years.

A lot has changed for LGBT in the past 20 years with the most significant changes taking place in the past decade.

It wouldn't be until 2004 that Massachusetts would be the first state to have Gay Marriage.

DOMA was in trade for DADT. Prior to DADT they (the military) could ask and you had to tell the truth. This meant that they could (and did) screen out homosexuals just by asking 'Are you Gay?' - If you lied and it came out you faced criminal charges. If you told the truth they gave you a dishonorable discharge.

Regan set some precedence while in office, he totally ignored HIV/AIDS. His predecessor did very little (Bush Sr). When Clinton took office getting DADT was actually a huge barrier breaker - for its time. It was a 'good trade' with Defense of Marriage Act after all no one in the 1990's would dare to dream that gay marriage was possible, and too no one dared to dream there would be a black president either.

Also understand the position of the public. At the time less than 30% of Americans were in support of LGBT rights of any kind. Unlike today where there may be a minor majority - some reporting as high as 55% are in favor of any gay rights with about 50% in favor of gay marriage.

The Early 1990's when Clinton took office were not as 'tolerant' to gays as this second decade of the 21st century is turning out to be.

For any politician to admit that they supported Gay Marriage in the 1990's was a kill shot to their political career. He was in his first term and if he wanted a second term as president he had to cow-tow to 'traditional' and social pressures of the time.

Clinton signed into law DADT and that started early in his first term (around 1993) DADT was a first term action, he took office in 1992.

While Don't Ask, Don't tell sounds like a stupid thing (it is), the reality is that it set the ground work for a lot of other federal 'tolerance' in matters of LGBT. It was intended as stepping stone to open gay service in the military which is what Clinton wanted at that time. It was a compromise which 19 years later was over turned and now we have openly serving LGBT in the armed forces.

DOMA is also a stepping stone, which will be over turned - eventually. Politics and civil laws are a process.

That's some interesting info on DADT, thanks.
In what way would you say DOMA is a stepping stone though, apart from being a trade off for DADT?
Silly Sarcastic So-and-so
Reply



Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  federal judge rejects Tennessee's anti-drag law CellarDweller 0 149 06-05-2023, 12:09 AM
Last Post: CellarDweller
  Federal Court Rules that Police Can Obtain Location Data w/o Warrant InbetweenDreams 14 2,883 06-08-2016, 06:39 PM
Last Post: JohnMusic
  interesting court case? pellaz 1 578 08-15-2013, 10:39 PM
Last Post: Genersis
  started again; US DOMA pellaz 2 542 07-23-2013, 08:06 PM
Last Post: VileKyle
  SCOTUS strikes down DOMA Woollyhats 11 997 06-26-2013, 10:50 PM
Last Post: ardus

Forum Jump:


Recently Browsing
1 Guest(s)

© 2002-2024 GaySpeak.com