Spittle Flying Christian Right Reactions to the DOJ Announcement on DOMA

As predicted, the untethered among the professional Christian set are nearly wetting themselves and the conniptions fit are unfolding and waves of spittle are flying from the lips of the likes of Tony Perkins and Maggie Gallagher over the announcement that the Obama administration Department of Justice will no longer defend sec. 3 of DOMA. DADT and DOMA have been the twin pillars of the Christianist in terms of utilizing the federal law to reinforce and justify their demonetization of LGBT citizens. With DADT on the way out, DOMA has been a even more cherished tool for the Christianists who seek to inflict their version of "Biblical law" on the rest of society. Before turning to the maniacal rants of the far right, here are some highlights from the Plum Line's reaction to today's announcement at the Washington Post:

"[T]he President's determination that Section 3 is unconstitutional unquestionably a welcome act of leadership on his part. It also hints at a larger dynamic that's worth noting. After the President did the right thing and threw his weight behind the repeal of don't ask don't tell, many argued that his success on that front would only make his position on DOMA less tenable -- basic consistency would demand that his administration stop defending it in court.
*
That's exactly what happened. Now, in similar fashion, his determination that the key plank of DOMA is unconstitutional may make his current position on the issue -- that he's "grappling" with it -- less tenable over time, too. Or, if it doesn't, it certainly should.
*
Obviously today's statement from Carney suggests Obama doesn't believe it's politically safe enough (yet) to declare full support for gay marriage. But the overall
dynamic is certainly encouraging. The arc of history is bending -- albeit slowly
-- in the right direction.

Enough for a rational reaction. Now for the spittle spraying lunatic reactions from "godly Christiants", Here first, the rants from KKK lover Tony Perkins at the hate group named the Family Research Council (Note: the last time I looked, the U.S. Constitution guaranteed freedom of religion to ALL citizens and, as such, Obama is upholding the oath of his office whereas Perkins actually wants him to violate and uphold Christianist religious beliefs only):

"This decision by President Obama and the Department of Justice is appalling. The President's failure to defend DOMA is also a failure to fulfill his
oath to 'faithfully execute the office of President of the United
States.' What will be the next law that he will choose not to enforce or uphold?

"With this decision the President has thrown down the gauntlet,
challenging Congress. It is incumbent upon the Republican leadership to respond
by intervening to defend DOMA, or they will become complicit in the President's
neglect of duty," concluded Perkins.

If that's not enough spittle spray to get you saturated, here's this from NOM - fat cow, I mean - self enriching Maggie Gallagher money making machine :

This fight is not over, it has only begun! On the one hand this is a truly
shocking extra-constitutional power grab in declaring gay people are a protected class, and it’s also a defection of duty on the part of the President Obama

And let's not Liberty Counsel, a Lynchburg based blight on the Commonwealth of Virginia headed up by Matt Staver, another theocrat who would suspend the Constitution if given his druthers and set up a theocracy:

This is outrageous and unthinkable that the President would abandon the defense
of marriage. President Obama has betrayed the American people by his refusal to
defend the federal law that affirms what many courts upheld as constitutional,
namely, that marriage is between one man and one woman. Regardless of President
Obama’s own ideological agenda, as President, he and his Attorney General have a
duty to defend lawfully passed legislation, especially when the essence of the
law has been upheld by many courts. Thirty states have passed marriage
amendments affirming marriage as one man and one woman. Today President Obama has ab his role as President of the United States and transformed his
office into the President of the Divided States.

Mr. Staver conveniently forgets that once upon a time slavery was "legal" in a majority of states as were bans on interracial marriage. Just because an ignorant majority favors discrimination against different minorities doesn't make such discrimination permissible under the U. S. Constitution. One would think that Staver would have learned from the Holocaust the dangers of mob majority rule and the dangers of using national laws to discriminate against disliked minorities. But with Staver - as with other such :godly Christians" - its all about his personal beliefs and the civil rights of others mean nothing.