Ron Paul Condemns Obama’s Decision to Abandon DOMA



LAKE JACKSON, TX – Congressman Ron Paul issued the following statement in response to Attorney General Eric Holder’s announcement that the Obama Administration will cease to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) against legal challenges.

“The Defense of Marriage Act was enacted in 1996 to stop Big Government in Washington from re-defining marriage and forcing its definition on the States. Like the majority of Iowans, I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman and must be protected.

“I supported the Defense of Marriage Act, which used Congress’ constitutional authority to define what other states have to recognize under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, to ensure that no state would be forced to recognize a same sex marriage license issued in another state. I have also cosponsored the Marriage Protection Act, which would remove challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act from the jurisdiction of the federal courts.

“The people of Iowa overwhelmingly supported, both houses of the Legislature passed, and the Governor signed into law the Iowa Defense Of Marriage Act in 1998.  Iowans then valiantly recalled three activist Judges who spurned the will of the people by over-turning the state’s law.

“Today’s announcement that the Obama Administration will abandon its obligation to enforce DOMA is truly disappointing and shows a profound lack of respect for the Constitution and the Rule of Law. President Obama has just unconstitutionally said that Iowa should have to allow San Francisco and New York City decide its marriage laws. That position is unacceptable.

“The Administration’s dereliction throws the door wide open for special interests to abuse Federal power and attempt to force Iowa to recognize non-traditional marriage. Upcoming battles are looming just over the horizon.

“I will stand with the people of Iowa, against Unconstitutional federal power grabs, and will fight to protect each state’s right not to be forced to recognize a same sex marriage against the will of its people. If I were a member of the Iowa legislature, I would do all I could to oppose any attempt by rogue judges to impose a new definition of marriage on the people of my state.”

Editor’s note: Since there were some questioning the authenticity of this statement I thought I’d do my due diligence and follow up on that.  I just got off the phone with Jesse Benton, Congressman Paul’s communications director.  He  did in fact make this statement and this has been a consistent position that he has held for years.  – Shane

Connect with Caffeinated Thoughts!

  • Gmartine

    Let us not forget his name rather.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RVQDWKBOFDPLYTBUZERYLQLYRY Ross P

    Ron Paul seriously missed the point of the President’s action. The President told the DOJ not to defend Section 3 of DOMA, not Section 2. Section 2 says that one state need not recognize same sex marriages of another state. Section 3 (the one being abandoned) says the Feds will not recognize same sex marriages EVEN IF they are valid within a particular state. i.e., the Feds are over ruling the decision within the state. This is NOT libertarian.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RVQDWKBOFDPLYTBUZERYLQLYRY Ross P

    Ron Paul seriously missed the point of the President’s action. The President told the DOJ not to defend Section 3 of DOMA, not Section 2. Section 2 says that one state need not recognize same sex marriages of another state. Section 3 (the one being abandoned) says the Feds will not recognize same sex marriages EVEN IF they are valid within a particular state. i.e., the Feds are over ruling the decision within the state. This is NOT libertarian.

  • Anonymous

    This is just political propaganda to slam Ron Paul. The only thing Dr. Paul is saying is that this is not and never should be a federal issue period. What happens when the next arrogant frikkin pres, gets in their and he decides he hates gays or mexicans or dogs or whatever. Wake up people the president has way to much power and we must put an end to it.

    • Baltimatt

      silvernale–

      Not sure why you consider this propaganda, assuming it is true. And if this is not a federal issue, why is Dr. Paul supposedly upset that the president is refusing to defend it in court?

  • Pingback: Obama’s Picking and Choosing What Laws He’ll Defend and Ron Paul’s Defense of DOMA » Caffeinated Thoughts

  • http://twitter.com/mmatalucci Michael Matalucci

    I don’t know why RP would make this statement. The libertarian position is that there should be NO state sanctioned marriage, gay or straight, only private contract. It is every state’s responsibility to uphold the inviolability of mutual, private contract.

  • Anonymous

    Real libertarians have known Ron Paul is a fraud for a long time.

    Between his racist past (profiting to the tune of millions off of white supremacist newsletters and then claiming he never wrote nor read any of them), and his homophobic present, the man is a big-government conservative masquerading as a libertarian.

    That he thinks government — state government, federal government, or city government — should be “defining” marriage shows how much of a Big Government tool he really is. It should not matter what your neighbors or “the people of a state” think of personal relationships between adults, let alone “punishing” it through the law by making it less than equal.

    That Ron Paul supports government regulation of people’s relationships shows, once and for all, that the man is not a libertarian — he’s a fraud.

  • Anonymous

    ron paul`s view on gay marriage is clear if you youtube him-it`s mostly about keeping the government out of it
    however these laws and bills are interpreted may cloud your view on ron paul-i would suggest watch the videos then make an opinion