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

If you like what you read, sign-up to get CT in your inbox!

Comments

  1. Falconplayer11 says

    There is no reason to believe that Dr. Paul did not say this. The issue is not about marriage, but about reining in the power of the federal government in favor of broader states’ rights.

    He is trying to win over the traditional conservatives with statements like this…it appears as if he is in support of traditional marriage, but really all he is saying is that the federal government ought to restrain its power.

  2. Nope. says

    I don’t buy this for a second.

    Ron Paul routinely states that the Government should not be involved in marriage at all.

    • Kevin says

      Unless, gay marriage is being interfered/forced by the state that does not allow/have it. You do not understand how government is suppose to work. The government is defending not enforcing. If a state with gay marriage is interfered/forced by outside states or outside people to write appeal their gay marriage laws, the government should protect and defend the state with gay marriage because that is their own interest and their own decision.

  3. Gmartine says

    Ron Paul has said that the federal government doesn’t have a place in marriage. If 2 people want to marry then that is fine. As long as the federal government is not forcing churches or states to dictate what marriage can be.

    As a side note Kent Snyder was Ron Paul’s 2008 campaign coordinator and he was gay and died of pneumonia/aids. He was a great patriot who Ron Paul trusted because of his individualism and actions to preserve liberty for all Americans. Let us who support liberty forgot his name.

  4. Gmartine says

    Ron Paul has said that the federal government doesn’t have a place in marriage. If 2 people want to marry then that is fine. As long as the federal government is not forcing churches or states to dictate what marriage can be.

    As a side note Kent Snyder was Ron Paul’s 2008 campaign coordinator and he was gay and died of pneumonia/aids. He was a great patriot who Ron Paul trusted because of his individualism and actions to preserve liberty for all Americans. Let us who support liberty forgot his name.

  5. says

    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.

  6. says

    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.

  7. Anonymous says

    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 says

      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?

  8. says

    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.

  9. Anonymous says

    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.

  10. Anonymous says

    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