Bush/Cheney asked their AG to give them a legal out so they could torture. Bush and Cheney used the DOJ to be their flunkies and to write them opinions which would justify torture and would override the laws as enacted by congress which outlaw torture. Bushco was president, the CnC, he didn't believe he had to follow the laws passed by congress and he got some of the DOJ attorneys to write opinions that said he didn't have to.

The number one thing you and others tend to overlook as you complain of the "tone" of the DOJ brief is history - the history of our society.

For years under aged women, minor females, were allowed to marry. It was a part of the the culture in many states, society not only accepted it, they expected it. My grandmother was 14 when she lawfully married my 21 year old grandfather. Grandfather was not a pedophile, he was no pervert, he was no criminal. Now, the state they were married in has a law that says under 18 needs parental consent, under 16 needs court order. Society changed, the culture changed and evolved and the state laws changed to reflect the change.

The case cited in the brief that critics label as "comparing homosexal marriage to pedophilia" did not deal with pedophilia, it dealt with one state recognizing or not recognizing the lawful marriage performed in another state.



There are some cultures to this day that allow and encourage marriages between relatives to keep the "blood line pure". The cases discussing marriage to relatives were not about incest, they were about one state not recognizing the lawful marriage of another state (or one state not sanctifying the cultural practice as enjoyed by persons of that culture).

Apparently, in 1957 New Mexico allowed first cousins to marry. Arizona did not. In re Mortenson's Estate, 316 P.2d 1106 (Ariz. 1957) (marriage of first cousins held invalid in Arizona, though lawfully performed in New Mexico, given Arizona policy reflected in statute declaring such marriages "prohibited and void").

In 1961, Italy allowed an uncle to marry his niece. Connecticut didn't recognize the marriage. Catalano v. Catalano, 170 A.2d 726, 728-29 (Conn. 1961) (marriage of uncle to niece, "though valid in Italy under its laws, was not valid in Connecticut because it contravened the public policy of th state".

DOMA is federal statute that says states have the right to pass laws that either restrict or allow marriages as the states deem appropriate. Thus, the cases cited were on point - they were legitimate legal argument supporting the contention that one state has refused to recognize the marriage performed in another state.