Paul Clement: Deny Gay Marriage Because Heterosexuals Are Sexually Irresponsible

A column in the Los Angeles Times looks at a perhaps overlooked aspect of the briefs filed by anti-gay forces in the Prop 8 and DOMA cases now pending before the U. S. Supreme Court.  Paul Clement, counsel for the HOP House members defending DOMA - who is ripping off American taxpayers to the tune of $3 million to date -  argues that the Court should uphold DOMA because it is rational that heterosexuals have special marriage rights because they are in essence sexually irresponsible and without marriage society would be faced with burdens associated with unwanted pregnancies and single parent families.  In Clement's bizarre world, he never quite explains how giving same sex couples civil marriage rights would somehow take away marriage rights for straights or encourage increased irresponsible, sexually promiscuous behavior by straights.  Nor does the argument give any consideration to the millions of children being raised by same sex couples who suffer as a result of their parents' lack of marriage rights.  The whole argument demonstrates the contortions the far right is going through trying to avoid any mention of the real reason they oppose gay marriage: religious based discrimination.  Here are column highlights:

Marriage should be limited to unions of a man and a woman because they alone can "produce unplanned and unintended offspring," opponents of gay marriage have told the Supreme Court.
By contrast, when same-sex couples decide to have children, "substantial advance planning is required," said Paul D. Clement, a lawyer for House Republicans.

Conservative attorneys did not argue that gays or lesbians engaged in "immoral" behavior or lifestyles. Instead they emphasized what they called the "very real threat" to society posed by opposite-sex couples when they are not bound by the strictures of marriage.

The traditional marriage laws "reflect a unique social difficulty with opposite-sex couples that is not present with same-sex couples — namely, the undeniable and distinct tendency of opposite-sex relationships to produce unplanned and unintended pregnancies," wrote Clement, a solicitor general under President George W. Bush. "Unintended children produced by opposite-sex relationships and raised out-of-wedlock would pose a burden on society."

"It is plainly reasonable for California to maintain a unique institution [referring to marriage] to address the unique challenges posed by the unique procreative potential of sexual relationships between men and women," argued Washington attorney Charles J. Cooper, representing the defenders of Proposition 8. Same-sex couples need not be included in the definition of marriage, he said, because they "don't present a threat of irresponsible procreation."

In the lower courts, defenders of the traditional laws struggled to explain why committed couples of the same sex should be denied the benefits of marriage. The plaintiffs include same-sex couples who are raising children.

Clement and Cooper do not address that issue directly. Instead, they argue that it is reasonable for the law to steer opposite-sex couples toward marriage, including by giving them extra benefits. "It was rational for Congress to draw the line where it did," Clement said, "because the institution of marriage arose in large measure in response to the unique social difficulty that opposite-sex couples, but not same-sex couples, posed."

What makes Clement's argument all the more laughable is the reality that the Christofascists have spent millions of dollars arguing that it is gays, not straights, who are irresponsible, promiscuous sex fiends who jump from bed to bed.  Again, they will go to any lengths to avoid religious based bigotry as the real reason for same sex marriage bans.  But then, honesty is not one of the strong suits of the far right and the Christofascists.

 

DOMA Supporters' Brief Claims Gays Too Powerful to Need Court Protection

Paul Clement (pictured above) -- the a former United States solicitor general and current partner with the Washington law firm Bancroft P.L.L.C, who is ripping off American taxpayers to the tune of $3 million so far - is apparently drinking Christofascist Kool-Aid.  How else to explain his argument in the brief filed on behalf of the GOP Congressional Conference in support of DOMA that says gays have become so powerful that  "There is absolutely no reason to think that gays and lesbians are shut out of the political process to a degree that would justify judicial intervention on an issue as divisive and fastmoving as same-sex marriage."  Clement needs to come across the Potomac to Virginia where we "powerful" gays have ZERO employment non-discrimination protections, have no non-discrimination protections in housing, and receive ZERO recognition of our committed life relationships.  In Virginia, we have about as much power politically as the slaves did in the Confederacy.  A piece in Huffington Post looks at this utter batshitery that all taxpayers are being forced to subsidize.  Here are excerpts:

A conservative attorney working on behalf of the GOP bolstered his argument to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) with the rationale that gay Americans have become so powerful they do not need special judicial protection as a minority. 

House Republicans have enlisted the services of Paul Clement -- a former United States solicitor general and current partner with the Washington law firm Bancroft P.L.L.C -- to fight their $3 million DOMA battle after President Barack Obama decided his administration will no longer defend the anti-gay legislation. 

On Tuesday, Clement's 60-page brief in United States v. Windsor was filed with the Supreme Court, revealing his arguments for the court to uphold DOMA, according to Think Progress.  Via United States v. Windsor:

In short, gays and lesbians are one of the most influential, best-connected, best-funded, and best-organized interest groups in modern politics, and have attained more legislative victories, political power, and popular favor in less time than virtually any other group in American history ... There is absolutely no reason to think that gays and lesbians are shut out of the political process to a degree that would justify judicial intervention on an issue as divisive and fastmoving as same-sex marriage.

United States v. Windsor is the Supreme Court version of Windsor v. United States, in which a New York federal court found that Section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional and violates the Fifth Amendment. Section 3 defines marriage as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife" and spouse as "a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife," thus providing unequal protection under the law. 

Think Progress blogger Ian Millhiser disputes Clement's argument, writing:

Political victories do not cancel out Americans’ constitutional rights, they augment them, and Clement is simply wrong to suggest otherwise. Ultimately, the sheer absurdity of Clement’s argument exposes why his claims must not prevail at the Supreme Court. The Constitution of Seneca Falls and Selma is also the Constitution of Stonewall. Clement’s argument would deny all three.

Clement is a liar and arguable mentally ill if he seriously believes his own argument.

 

House GOP To Spend $3 Million+ Fighting Gay Equality

To listen to House Speaker John Boehner the highest priority for the nation is to reduce spending - even if it means leaving grandma with reduced medical care and subsisting off of dog food.   But as is the norm with today's GOP, only certain spending must be cut, namely that which benefits the poor and less fortunate or which would rebuild the nation's crumbling infrastructure.  In contrast, there's plenty of money to be spent defending a laws struck down by two of the U.S Courts of Appeal and a number of federal district courts.  The law in question?  DOMA, of course, which seeks to force the federal government to discriminate against LGBT Americans who are legally married under state law.  Think Progress looks at John Boehner's and the House GOP's willingness to squander taxpayer money furthering anti-gay bigotry.  Here are excerpts:

Late Monday, House Democrats learned that the Republican leadership had once again secretly renegotiated its contract with attorney Paul Clement to defend the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act at the Supreme Court. This is the third time the contract has been adjusted, raising total costs to $3 million from the original $500,000 cap.

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) both sit on the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG), the House body intervening to defend DOMA in court in lieu of the Department of Justice’s decision not to. However, they did not find out about BLAG’s new agreement with Clement until after it had already been finalized. They wrote to Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) to decry the increased spending:

Let us be clear: these steps do not reflect the will of the House or the consensus of the BLAG. Democrats do not support any decisions to invest taxpayer funds in defense of an indefensible law. We remain united in our opposition to any effort to preserve, protect, and defend discrimination in our country.

From the start, the Republican-led campaign to defend DOMA has been a practice in futility and a waste of Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars. The Republican-appointed, taxpayer-funded legal team has lost in every case. Courts across the nation have stood on the side of justice and equality for all Americans. DOMA is on its way into the dustbin of history.

It would be bad enough if Republicans were losing in court and accepting the result. Yet it is the height of hypocrisy for House Republicans to waste public funds in one breath then claim the mantle of fiscal responsibility in the next.

 Despite the apparent hypocrisy, Boehner has not backed down from his intent to fund the defense of DOMA. In December, when the last increase was discovered, he was asked about the spending at a press conference. He angrily responded that if the Department of Justice won’t defend the law of the land, Congress will, before storming away from the podium.

Let's be clear.  John Boehner is a bigoted asshole.   It is also telling that Boehner considers himself to be a good practicing Catholic.  A Catholic whose silence has been deafening when it comes to demanding a house cleaning of the Church of those who aided, abetted and covered up the rape of minors.  Hypocrite is the most apt word that springs to mind that doesn't involve four letter words.