Florida | Gay Marriage | News | Pam Bondi

Florida AG Pam Bondi Takes Exception to Anger Over Marriage Brief: 'I'm Simply Doing My Job'

Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, who last week asked a federal judge to throw out a lawsuit against the state on behalf of eight gay couples seeking recognition of their marriages, saying it would "impose significant public harm" and damage the institution's real purpose (children having mothers and fathers), released a statement today taking exception to those who are angry about it.

Writes Bondi, in part: Bondi

“In 2008, Florida voters amended their state constitution to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. In response to a recent challenge to this provision, and in keeping with my sworn duty to uphold the laws of the land, my office recently filed a legal brief defending the voters' decision.

“The fundamental argument of our brief is that the voters had the right to adopt this definition of marriage, just as they have the right in the future to change their minds and afford legal recognition to same sex marriage, should they so choose.

“Defending the wishes of the voters who enacted Florida's marriage amendment necessarily requires me to make good faith legal arguments. In presenting those arguments, my office understands and respects that there are many who profoundly disagree with the voters' decision. But anything less than the best defense of our voters' policy preferences would disenfranchise the electorate, undermine the judicial process, and cast aside the professional responsibility that guides me every day as Attorney General.

The subject of same sex marriage is understandably a matter of intense personal concern and sensitivity for Floridians on all sides of the debate. While defending this constitutional amendment, we have remained respectful and showed consideration for those with differing viewpoints—acknowledging in the introduction that this issue is one with ‘good people on all sides.’

“Therefore, I take exception to those who have sought to manipulate our brief, trying to make it something it is not. The brief does not argue for or against same sex marriage as a matter of policy, wisdom, or fairness. Those decisions are for the voters of each state, not for lawyers or courts. It is my duty to protect Florida from the “harm” of a federal injunction overriding the will of Florida voters.

“Some states recognize same-sex marriage, and some states do not. As the brief explains on pages two and three:

‘This case is not about which policy choice is better or worse. And this case is not about whether the debate should continue (which it surely will). This case is about whether states can make their own determinations.

Bondi adds:

“Our brief makes the case in defense of Florida's marriage amendment with great respect for the plaintiffs and those whom they represent. Any suggestions to the contrary are not only wrong, but hurtful, designed to inflame, and insulting to everyone involved. When I defend the voters' decisions with professionalism and civility, I'm simply doing my job because my job is not to write the law, but to defend it.”

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. In other words she is an empty suit. Someone with no values or empathy for the people who she represents. Someone who will lie and deceive to defend the indefensible. A sad person.

    Posted by: Jay | Jun 3, 2014 1:01:50 PM


  2. Me thinks that AG Blondie doth protest too much...

    Posted by: UrbanMike | Jun 3, 2014 1:02:06 PM


  3. Some States recognize same sex marriage and some do not.

    Well, Blondie, they do because the voters were either pro-active and voted for it or they were forced by judicial proceedings to do so. Voters aren't the be-all-end-all of power...they are just the fourth cog in the process after the legislative, administrative and judicial cogs. Your responsibility is to all the citizens and not just the bigoted mass. Your laziness belies your own thoughts on the matter.

    Posted by: woodroad34 | Jun 3, 2014 1:03:28 PM


  4. But that's the thing. Voters don't have the right to do whatever they wish. State Constitutional amendments still have to abide by the US Constitution which includes the 14th Amendment. "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

    Posted by: Andy | Jun 3, 2014 1:05:25 PM


  5. Oh...and I believe a "Puhleeze, Mary" is in order for your use of the term "good faith". Opposite day is so de rigueur for you people-I'm surprised you even know you're wearing a green blouse.

    Posted by: woodroad34 | Jun 3, 2014 1:06:13 PM


  6. "I was only following orders!"
    - Pam Bondi, and others

    Posted by: Mike | Jun 3, 2014 1:07:07 PM


  7. " This case is about whether states can make their own determinations. "

    I agree. States can make their own determinations ---- as long as such determinations do not violate the US Constitution. What is so difficult to understand about that requirement??

    Posted by: AdamTh | Jun 3, 2014 1:07:15 PM


  8. More Blonde feminism....

    Posted by: styler | Jun 3, 2014 1:07:52 PM


  9. She's a typical GOPer political hack. Oh, and a US Constitutional idiot, too.

    Posted by: HadenoughBS | Jun 3, 2014 1:08:32 PM


  10. I'm guessing that she got her law degree at Liberty University.

    Posted by: bkmn | Jun 3, 2014 1:14:25 PM


  11. Styler insinuates feminism (and women) to be inherently homophobic because he is actually Rick, who HATES women for some reason.

    Posted by: Tyler | Jun 3, 2014 1:26:16 PM


  12. She's auditioning for FOX Noise: blond, stupid and narrow-minded.

    Which of her THREE MARRIAGES fulfills her statement of purpose for marriage? Oops, none.

    Go away little moron.

    Posted by: SteveDenver | Jun 3, 2014 1:31:56 PM


  13. probably a northern florida college
    or maybe she just sucked something to get a degree

    Posted by: capetom | Jun 3, 2014 1:32:03 PM


  14. Republican Barbie didn't get the memo that other AG's have decided not to fight state bans as they clearly violate the US constitution.

    Posted by: qj201 | Jun 3, 2014 1:40:02 PM


  15. "I was just following orders."

    Didn't work at Nuremburg; doesn't work now.

    Posted by: Mark Alexander | Jun 3, 2014 1:47:19 PM


  16. She's headed over to Fox...let's do the Greta or Megyn interview and then get a job kissing Sean's ass for the camera. Maybe we can get Greta on board our RV to travel the backhills with us...very Palinesque. Who?

    Posted by: Paul B. | Jun 3, 2014 1:49:47 PM


  17. Florida has the perfect amount of crazy

    Posted by: mymy | Jun 3, 2014 1:51:07 PM


  18. Good grief, that response was the very definition of the term "butt-hurt."

    Posted by: ATLJason | Jun 3, 2014 1:54:04 PM


  19. And now she plays the victim. She is disgusting.

    Posted by: Steve | Jun 3, 2014 2:12:21 PM


  20. Nothing discounts opinions about the marriage debate more than the source itself...on her third marriage at 48 years old. Is there someone more credible with an opinion to offer besides a woman with multiple failed marriages?

    Posted by: Johnnybegood | Jun 3, 2014 2:20:38 PM


  21. She never studied outside of Florida, married and divorced twice, and is now engaged again. From Wikipedia, "they (she and the latest fiance) held an unofficial (non-binding) ceremony in the Cayman Islands on May 26, 2012. Wow.

    Posted by: RAY | Jun 3, 2014 2:24:01 PM


  22. This sounds like a great opportunity for some investigation of her performance record. Has she consistently upheld every state law violation that hit her desk or has she let some slide ?

    Posted by: Nope, just Nope. | Jun 3, 2014 2:26:42 PM


  23. There is now proof that peroxide damages the brain.

    Posted by: Mike in the Tundra | Jun 3, 2014 2:28:42 PM


  24. In other words, money is more important to her than values. Hitler's men were just doing their jobs, too.

    Posted by: Jack M | Jun 3, 2014 2:36:10 PM


  25. Her brief states that same-sex marriage "would impose significant public harm." Yet her explanation now states that "the brief does not argue for or against same sex marriage as a matter of policy." Is Bondi too dumb to recognize that those two statements are in direct contradiction?

    Posted by: Douglas | Jun 3, 2014 2:57:25 PM


  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Rush Limbaugh Schooled on the Word 'Tranny': VIDEO« «