first of all, it is not a violation of doma. second, i think this amendment is a violation of the first amendment freedom of religion rights of that faith minister and of those service members. there's a difference between legal marriage and the religious ceremony that commemorates a marriage. i completely agree that a rule or statute of the department of defense that purports to authorize the legal institute demerit among service members would be outside the jurisdiction of what the department does. no one is suggesting that should be the case. we are suggesting that if a chaplain chooses to perform a religious ceremony voluntarily that involves two service members of the same gender. the exclusion of the right to do that with two people different agendas differently it -- is a violation of religious freedom. no one has to accept as a religious doctrine same-sex marriage. i would be the first one to vote against and speak against any rule that says the catholic priest has to perform a same-sex marriage. or an orthodox rabbi or

country should do is freeze the situation and reflect on it but the court said there's nothing in doma that suggests that it was a temporary law. it finds that that's not a sufficient justification at all. and finally the court said it's very hard for us to know what congress had in mind given there was only one day of hearings and very little debate before congress passed the defensive marriage act doma passed into law by president clinton. they said, look, we realize it's going go to the supreme court. it's really the only court that can truly make a decision so it puts a hold on the effect of the ruling while the case goes into ee pee apeop apeople. you may remember it defended it and then when it came to the appeals court the obama administration and attorney general holder said we thing it's unconstitutional, we're not going defend it. the house of representatives then hired a lawyer and he's been the one defending it so i'm assuming house will choose to appeal the decision. >> nbc justice krornlt peetd williams live in washington, d.c. thanks so much. as you bring up about the ob

the other law that we do have is the doma law. the defense of marriage act. and the defense of marriage act obviously does have some impact with regards to the benefits that are provided to same-sex couples, and so we continue to review the benefits, but those have to be provided consistency doma, and until -- until doma is either rejected by the courts or changed by the congress, that's the law we abide by. >> yeah. personally, i follow the rule of law that governs the issue you just described. when asked for my military advice to the secretary of defense and the president, i form it with the joint chiefs, and we provide it privately. >> on the marriage -- >> yeah. is a military officer and the idea that everyone in the service is to be treated equally, does it concern you that some service members are allowed to get married, say on military bases, other service members do not have that right? >> if i could, sir, there's, so there's three bins of things -- this sunder review. has been since don't ask, don't tell. three bins into which these privileges and as

>> under doma?>> if it is federal land or federal property, it would go against doma. >> i would yield back to mr. critz. before i do, may i simply say that the doma statute for marriage means one man and one woman. unless you have a statue, that would outlaw marriages or specifically authorize marriages, and federal parks, you can have a same-sex marriage in a federal park. that just happens. i will yield back to mr. critz. >> my question was just clarification. i do not understand what would happen -- because i don't think it is illegal. and i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. the chernow recognizes the congresswoman from california. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i to rise -- by, too, rise in opposition of this amendment. to think that we are spending time on this amendment when we have taken up hundreds of billions of dollars today without even a comment here or there -- it is somewhat striking, i think. i think the most important thing to appreciate is that this would only take place in states

filed this this brief in a doma challenge that they used some really really antiquated language about the fact that doma isn't even discriminatory because anybody is allowed to marry and that that change over time just in the past three years both in terms of public perception and in terms of obama's position on it has really changed the way that those people are going to look at the president and that's a fine thing chris thank you so much for being with us tonight appreciate it and thanks for your great journalism. let's hope that if or i should say when republicans try to use the president's announcement today against him during the election that the american people will recognize just how out of touch the republican party is today with american values and why this station has come too far to rally behind relics like mitt romney and the republican party more on this topic coming up in our rumble in just a few minutes. it's wednesday are you ready to rumble joining me for tonight's long liberal rumble are marc harrold libertarian commentator attorney and author and laughlin mark a i

but those have to be provided consistent with doma. and until doma is either rejected by the courts or changed by the congress, that's the law we abide by. >> yeah, personally, i follow the rule of law that governs the issue you just described. when asked for my military advice to the secretary of defense and the president, we -- i form it with the joint chiefs, and we provide it privately. >> the marriage -- on the marriage -- >> as a military officer, in the idea that everyone in the services be treated equally, does it concern you that some service members are allowed to get married on military bases; other service members are -- do not have that right? >> there's three -- if i could, sir, there's three -- so there's three bins of things we're -- this is under review, has been since "don't ask, don't tell." there's three bins into which these privileges and, as you describe them, rights -- that one is self-declared. so a young man or woman can self-declare, for example, who's going to get their insurance benefits. then there's polic

and the fact that he doesn't want to have doma any more is huge.gone, then we can really move forward with federal receipts. i think it's very easy to be a naysayer about how far we haven't come, but i'm taking the tack this time, this is huge. we've come a long, long way. we have a lot of people we're to be grateful for. this is my president, president obama. i can't wait to get out there and vote for him, can't wait for work for his campaign. i feel very, very excited. >> let me ask you then about mitt romney. he doesn't support same-sex marriage or civil unions. do you have a message for him and maybe the gop on why you might think republicans should consider their stance? >> well, as we all know and as you've reported, attitudes are changing about same-sex marriage. we are in the midst of an evolution of beliefs. you know, i feel saddened for people who can't see the necessity for civil rights, for gay people in the united states. i think there's a lot of political fear with christian conservative, other religious conservative groups that affec

not defending doma against court challenge, saying that he would sign a repeal of the doma bill being did the things that showed that the evolution is complete. >> the evolution is complete. mark halperin, what happened yesterday? >> he took a political risk. >> was it a political risk? >> i think on balance the reason they were not doing it right away is because there is risk involved. this could hurt the president but infuses his campaign with emotion in a positive way. if you look at mitt romney and john bone another how they talked about it it yesterday, they tried to seem to be moving on from the issue rather than what would happen five years ago, it would have been a national firestorm, would have been unthinkable and imperiled their campaign. that shows how far this public opinion has moved on this. >> and you could hear the collective sigh combined with cheers. the question whether or not it's a tough political decision. the gallup poll shows 57% of independents, the people in the middle who will decide this election support gay marriage. >> every time it's been on the ballot,

namely, but oppoing doma, by saying that he would not carry out the unconstitutional mandate that wenefits as anybody else. there is no general federal marriage policy. so, again, in public policy, he did just the right thing. but as you know, we have several referenda coming. and there has been some effort within the african-american community to kind of say, oh, well, family stability is important. these people are trying to undermine it. in the california referenda in 2008, people were quoting barack obama's opposition at that point to same-sex marriage, in literature aimed at the black community. we have a very important referendum coming up this year in the state of maryland, where the legislature got this, governor o'malley took the lead, and same-sex marriage was approved. i was fearing that you would see people who were trying not to allow this to go forward, invoking president obama in the referendum. now they won't be able to do that. plus, that's it's also important what the president says. and i think with regard to bill clinton, it was important that he was saying 15 yea

we wouldn't be not stopping enforcing doma or trying to repeal doma in congress through the freedom to marry act if the president didn't believe that committed couples deserves the same rights and protections. we wouldn't be repealing things like don't ask, don't tell and removing every federal barrier that we can on our own to ensure that gay and lesbian couples have the same rights and protections as other couples. throws significant steps forward in just 3 1/2 years of this administration. so when you say that gay and lesbian voters have no place else to go, i find that completely wrong because we have a record that we're proud of. and we have a record that gay and lesbian voters across this country have been drawn to. they appreciate the progress that we've been making. after years of fighting to pass hate crimes in congress, we finally got it done. there are significant accomplishments in this administration to ensuring equality for everybody. >> the question to joe biden was not about the civil unions. the question to joe biden was about marriage. marriage is different from equal

novena corte de circuito revisa la decision de un juez de san francisco que dijo que la iniciativa 'domaa de "fidel castro", "mariela castro", vendrá a san francisco para participar en una cumbre de estudios latinoamericanos y en algunos eventos sobre los derechos de la comunidad gay.y su visita ya esta causando controversia... maÑana hay quienes planean protestar la participacion de mariela en un foro en una organizacion en el distrito de castro...beatriz ferrari nos informa... como decian, las reacciones a la llegada de mariela castro son diversas... por un lado, algunos critican su visita y cuestionan su defensa de los derechos de las personas gay en cuba, mientras que por otro lado, otros estan en favor de que haya intercambio de opiniones y esperan con ansia a escucharla >>> es un momento muy importante >>> la polémica aumenta estará en el área de la bahia, pero también llegará hasta el centro en el distrito de castro en san francisco, estará con liderees en movimiento en favor de la comunidad gay la hija del presidente de cuba, las razones, son variadas arnaldo nos decía que él est

as militaries and there are some restrictions now in the bill coming forward tonight on spending on doma. are there other steps to take and do you support the steps taken so far? >> we have a lot of members who have ideas of what's important to them and you see those items advance here every day. the american people are concerned about our economy. they're concerned about jobs. that's why if you've seen us focused over the last year and a half on jobs and cutting spending, because our debt and our deficit are like a wet blanket hanging over our economy. so we're going to continue to stay focused on what the american people want us to stay focused on. >> now that congressman has been accused of orchestrating -- the federal election committee. do you think he should be relieved of his vice chairm chairmanship of the -- >> i'm not familiar with the accusation you mentioned against him. i know they're continuing to look at this. i don't know anymore. >> this morning a big plan to make the american campaign issues and that they're also going to push for a constitutional amendment to gay marri

. >> if you were against it, you were already against barack obama because of what he did on doma, if you were for it, you were for barack obama but it has an impact first of all, there will be some people who will be more emboldened to speak out now. you know, this is a society where people influence each other. and when the president says it, there will be people, probably won't make any difference in manhattan, los angeles, cambridge, massachusetts. but in parts of the country where people are still feeling a little intimidated, morally and cultural culturally, having the president on their side will be very helpful. these things don't operate in a one-to-one fashion and it isn't necessarily just about marriage, i think it is, it is helpful. again, we're on, we're on the move. he's actually right about the generational issue. some generational issues, people think one way at 25nd they may think differently at 50. in this situation on ltbt rights, every indication we have is that people aren't prejudiced at 25, aren't going to become prejudiced later. "lean forward" on the "rachel m

doma as it's called defines marriage as strictly heterosexual one man one woman. it denies all sorts of benefits to gay couples and that's one reason the court in boston says it cannot stand. cnn legal contributor paul callan joins me on the phone. paul, let's talk exactly about what this ruling means right now and then we'll move into what this could mean at a higher level. >> okay. let me start, kyra, by saying this is a federal court in the new england area, the first circuit court of appeals, and they cover basically, you know, maine, vermont, new hampshire, puerto rico, believe it or not, and massachusetts. so this ruling is binding only on that area of the united states, the federal courts that cover that area of the united states. it's a very, very important precedent that will be looked at by courts around the united states and there are at least seven other lawsuits pending, challenging the doma act. this is a very important precedent. >> this also makes it more likely that it could move its way up to the supreme court, yes? >> absolutely yes. because wha

declare doma. look at support for gay marriage, something that the president has not said anything about, 47% support it and 43% are against it. that's a poll last month by pew. should he put gay marriage as part of his platform? and if not, why. >> i think he has an opportunity here to make ultra conservatives look like cave men on this issue. he has been saying for years his position is evolving and yet we have no idea in what way his position--his views have evolved. he has not made that clear. at this point for him to keep saying that just sounds likety ideaidiotcy. most people who have been following the issues agree in his personal views the president probably supports gay marriage. then the question becomes should he stand up for what he believes in? and i think he should. >> we were just talking about whether or not the president when running for president michael was just saying it's an election year. you have to root for the things that are in your self interest. michael, is there somethi

equality house republicans passed a measure in support of the discriminatory defense of marriage act doma which is a federal ban against same sex marriage republican measure also forbids the department of justice from using taxpayer funds to oppose doe even though wednesday was a historic day for the nation president united states coming out in support of marriage equality for the first time in history it's clear that this will be a long battle before the l g b t q many. community finally gets its full civil rights and will be in the president's leadership until victory is achieved but just as important will also need more grassroots activism pressuring lawmakers and even pressure in the president to go another step further here's the bigger picture on this president obama yesterday said gay couples should be able to get married go to him for that but he also said it's a state's right issue bad on him for that we've we've heard that before for example back in one thousand nine hundred one tony pace and mary cox were arrested for having sex in alabama the crime was that she was white and h

. >> there's a story in the washington times this week, that he's planning to stay mum on the doma acts and whether or not that should be repealed. another piece if the wall street journal looks at how this might affect some contentious senate races. john tester supports civil unions isn't going as far as calling for gay marriage. some democrats are keeping their distance as the party tries to hold on to the senate chamber, do you think this will cost the president votes in swing states? >> it may. it may cost him some votes, there may be a political upside as well. so this discussion is going to go on all the way until election day. it's a courageous stand. and it's a stand that is not an easy one to take. and that's why a lot of rural senators don't do it. rural america sometimes comes around a little bit slower than more of the highly populated areas of the country. but that doesn't mean they're not going to eventually get there. marriage equality is a big issue. it's a little issue as well. inequality in our country is something that is not going to be tolerated. i think that genera

have we not spent the last three years cleaning up in a way, the mess created by president clinton, doma bill he signed that violated most of our sense of decency, and don't ask, don't tell. >> i have worked for president clinton -- [ overlapping speakers ] >> i don't think i would exactly characterize it that way. >> but it is kind of true isn't it? >> here is the way i like to look at it, and that is that, you know, back in '96 when president clinton signed the defensive marriage act, his political advisor said it was too risky not to. he felt he was forced to for political reasons, but now because the country has traveled so far and we have traveled so far culturally on these issues president obama was able to take a different stand and reject the advice of some of his political advisors. so i give him a lot of credit i really think it's a profile of courage. >> i agree with you. noah, the legal issue or philosophical issue raised by the president's pastor will churches will required to recognize marriages which they do not wish based upon their own doctrine to recognize? how does the

and the president told the dodge stop defending doma. >> yeah absolutely.fend something that is indefendable. >> thank you. >> oh, thank you. he'll take no further questions from me. >> thank you. >> no, thank you. >> oh, no you first. thank you. >> all right. hello cindy. [ laughter ] >> hi, steph, jim, chris i'm enjoying current first of all. and romney taking credit for the auto bailout it was president obama who made the decision to use the seals to get bin laden, and get all of the intelligence that the bombing would have destroyed. and even gates who is a squishy liberal said that took courage. he president is just supposed to say all he did was deliver snacks to the conference room or whatever. >> yeah. >> i do remember when the auto bailout happens, that the president -- part of the conditions of getting the money and doing what they had to do which still would have been the way a bankruptcy would have hand replace the ceo, restructure compensation, and he was called a dictator. >> oh, yeah, he wants to own car companies, and blah blah blah. and rom

the president campaigned on the repeal of doma. he has endorsed legislation to meet that goal. >> well said. is the administration holding a vote against that statute? >> i haven't heard that. the president's position is clear. the actions taken as a result of that position are clear. participation of the department of justice and the specific litigation is clear but i don't have anything for you on that proposal, which i have not heard. >> the other thing i want to ask you about is there was a vote yesterday among exxonmobil shareholders to include lgbt nondiscrimination protections for its more than 80,000 workers that work at the corporation. their shareholders voted down the proposal but it's still possible for the board to accept it without shareholders. when you talked about the executive order not happening at the time, you said that the administration was committed to directly engaging with and educating all sectors of the business community from major corporations to contractors to small businesses and raising public aware

the defense of marriage and, doma, does that impact with regard to the benefits that are provided toame-sex couples, so we continue to review the benefits, but those have to be provided consistent with doma. until doma is either rejected by the courts or changed by congress, that is the law we abide by. >> personally, i follow the rule of law. when asked for my military advice, i inform with the joint chiefs and the provide that privately. >> the idea that everyone in the service is to be treated equally, but does it concern you that some service members are not allowed to get married on military bases? >> there are three things -- this has been under review since "don't ask, don't tell" and there are three bins. one of them is self-declared. a young man or young woman can self-declare who will get their insurance benefits. and there are policies. the secretary controls that peridots are a under review. and there's a lot. we don't control that. -- then there is the law and we don't control that. >> it's very clear that state law controls the marriage situation. where state law provid

courts around the united states and there are at least seven other lawsuits pending, challenging the doma act. this is a very important precedent. >> this also makes it more likely that it could move its way up to the supreme court, yes? >> absolutely yes. because what the supreme court likes to do, especially when dealing with controversial issues, is to basically allow the lower courts to resolve it and come up with different solutions and then the supreme court, you know, hands down a decision for the entire country. >> and now you mentioned seven other existing cases? >> yes. i was just -- as i was reading the decision of the court in massachusetts, i was looking, yes. there are right now, as i count it, there are eight prominent defense of marriage act cases pending around the united states, and this was considered to be one of the most important ones, but there's one in new york, the southern district of new york, there's one in connecticut, there's another in california, all over the country, this law is being challenged on constitutional grounds. so a lot of other courts will look

the lack of actually following through with doma, things of that nature. what is the president going to do? >> professor hendricks before we get to your area of expertise, biblical interpretation. is this more an issue of justice than religion? give us a sense of your understanding of the issue. >> i think it is about justice. it's a question of human personality. i don't think that all the churches that reject marriage equality are doing it viciously. many of them deeply believe it. what they overlook is that all people are equal under the law. constitutionally everyone should have the right to marry, to have all the rights of the one they love whether it's the same sex or not. it's about justice also because jesus gave us one major way to judge one another. that's in matthew 25. as you have not fed the hungry and clothed the naked and sheltered the homeless, you have not done it to me. those who don't look out for one another, he said they are the ones that are going to go to hell. the way we judge one another is how we treat one another. whether someone

doma defines marriage as strictly heterosexual.nies benefits to gay couples and that's one reason the court in boston says it cannot stand. cnn's senior legal analyst jeffrey toobin is joining me by phone to get caught up on the significance here. hey there, jeff. we know there are similar lawsuits that have been filed and are pending across the country. tell me how significant today's ruling is. >> it's a very important one. this is a very respected court, the first circuit court of appeals, a very respected generally conservative judge, michael boudin, who wrote the within, and it's a very simple legal issue. the defense of marriage act says that the federal government will not recognize same-sex marriages even in states where it's legal. so hin this case you have a married couple, two women, who are as married as any other couple in massachusetts, straight or gay, and they do not get the same tax return rights that straight couples get. you know, they can't file a joint tax return. they can't inherit money in the same way of str

i make a brief point that executive branch has made a decision not to defend doma which is the law of the land. so that's a discretion that apparently we would concede to the executive branch of government, not to defend doma. but not accepting an think the sis of it which is -- antithesis of it which is the blackburn amendment. >> i appreciate that. that's absolutely correct. mr. schiff: if the justice department determines in its view, just as you and i must, that something is constitutional and must be defended or something is unconstitutional and cannot be defended, then we have to follow through with those obligations. but i don't think it's our position to defund the justice department when in the good faith execution of its oath to uphold the constitution it is defending a law that this congress has passed. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california yield back his time? >> the worst form of democracy is to take away the ability for it to work. thanks bad amendment and i hope we oppose it. the chair: the gentlema

i urge my colleagues not to vote for this whatever you think of doma, because if doma is constitutional, this is -- if doma is declared unconstitutional, this would be unconstitutional, and if it's not, it's unnecessary and has no effect in any event. so -- i don't know what the point of wasting our time with it is, but we should oppose it. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado rise? >> mr. chairman, i request to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. polis: thank you, mr. chairman. this is a very strange amendment, as my colleagues have pointed out. we are obviously a very diverse country, some states allow same sex marriages, others don't. some have civil unions. my home state of colorado is discussing this issue in the state legislature, it's certainly very contentious and i wish them well in coming to a speedy resolution. but what this amendment does is simply contravenes something that doesn't occur. it talks about funds being used in contravention of the defense of marriage

and still at the federal level, because of doma even same-sex marriage are being denied. >> a lot ofn for joining us inside "the war room" and fighting the battle. >> that's sean eldridge, senior advisor for "freedom to marry." and coming up, follow the money, if gay marriage was a fund-raising tool before today, just guess how it is going to be used now. that's next, and it's a story you will find only inside "the war room." ♪ look, i don't play 'bout my facial hair. but if i grow this out a little bit i look too much like an english country gent... naaah. a little this way and i feel like i'm from outer space. this and i feel like a viking... [ roars ] not my style, man. [ male announcer ] master your style... even trimming, a close shave and accurate edging... with the new gillette fusion proglide styler. every inch of hair needs to be on point. ♪ ♪ polar shifts will reverse the earth's gravitational pull and hurtle us all into space. which would render retirement planning unnecessary. but say the sun rises on december 22nd and you still need to retire. td ameritrade's investment

and still at the federal level, because of doma even same-sex marriage are being denied. >> a lot ofork to do thank you, sean for joining us inside "the war room" and fighting the battle. >> that's sean eldridge, senior advisor for "freedom to marry." and coming up, follow the money, if gay marriage was a fund-raising tool before today, just guess how it is going to be used now. that's next, and it't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't't' >>(narrator) gavin newsom, lieutenant governor of california, and former mayor of san francisco is coming to current tv. >>every night on cable news networks everyone's focusing on what's wrong. i want this show to move past that. i love creative people, and with all the vexing problems we have we need creative thinking. >>(narrator) with interviews with notables from silicon valley, hollywood, and beyond. >>at the end of the day this show's simple. it's about ideas. ideas are the best politics. ideas can bring us together. >>(narrator) the gavin newsom show. coming to current tv. >>> just moments after president obama's dramatic

the justice department stopped enforcing the issue you talked about, doma, defense of marriage act as in the capital. but the thing about it is, right now he had no choice. the plan was from everything i've been able to report to wait until after the election. you don't need to excite anger and polarization and surround this issue. don't forget. part of his base, we saw this in north carolina, just yesterday, is critically opposed to this issue. that is african-americans. >> bret: this is what romney said this afternoon when asked about this issue on the stat statement. >> my view is that marriage, itself, is a relationship between a man and a woman. and that is my own preference. i know other people have differing views. this is a very tender and sensitive topic as are many social issues. i have the same view i have had since, well, since running for office. >> bret: how does it play politically, david? >> it's an interesting question. i think in the immediate it can cut two ways. first, it can energize world voters and voters that have been he is tant or enthusiastic to support mitt

administration in february 2011 stops defending doma and the president's quote.her fascinating thing about this over the last 48 hour, silence from the republican romney side. not like exploit, democrats a pro-gay marriage party. >> mitt romney made brief comments about it yesterday to a local tv station in ohio basically saying, my suspicion that marriage is between one man and one woman and that's never going to change. you know, you've seen them have to grapple with some issues around gay rights even in their own campaign, yet in a national security spokesman who resigned after the party didn't step up and defend him after taking heat from the left wing. he has to walk the line, many uncomfortable with him historically and others who say the country is going in the direction of supporting these rights. >> sure. and this political calculation you hear from democrats, why could president obama be holding out? they point to more religious african-americans. you know, when we did our last nbc/"wall street journal" poll, the biggest jumps in support for gay marriag

could the senate moving to repeal doma on the flip side energize the base?ould that help progressive democrats? >> as you probably know, the judiciary committee has had hearings on that issue. many of our candidates are in favor, including bob geary in nebraska of the reversal. we are eager to have that conversation. as i mentioned before, we don't see it as an either/or. we believe we can do multiple things at one time. and while we are committed to causes around equality we also want to make sure that we are not walking away. and that we are holding mitt romney and republicans around the country accountable for their drafterous record. you know unlike 2010, jennifer, this election is going to be a choice between the two parties and their vision for our country. whether it's women's health, whether it's how theo get our economy moving again. whether it's how we take care of the middle class. and we are confident when voters see that choice clearly that they are going to vote for democrats around the country. >> so we saw dick lugar get primaried out earlier

the law, known as doma, defines legal marriage as a union between one man and one woman. >> in the houseday, they rejected a bill imposing criminal penalties for abortion based on the sex of a fetus. most republicans supported the bill calling it a matter of protecting the rights of the unborn. it did not get the two-thirds majority it needed under a hurry-up procedure republicans leaders used to bring the bill to the floor quickly. >>> new york may be the city that never sleeps but new yorkers might no have sugary drinks to help them out and keep them awake for much longer. they are proposing to ban large size sodas and sugary beverageses. major bloomberg tweeted his support saying more than half of nyc adults, 58%, are overweight or obese. we are doing something about that. >>> the big gulp is going to be a collector's item? man, what is the world coming to. >> it is a tough call. childhood obesity and diabetes is a health crisis but then you ask, is this the government's job? >> fascinating debate but i love me a big gulp. >> you know, what i might say next will get me in trouble. so