Shark Tank

Bachmann: “Marriage was created by the hand of God”, Gays are um… ‘Gay’ About Supreme Court Decision

gay adoption


The U.S. Supreme Court has just struck down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) as “unconstitutional,” violating the 5th Amendment.As expected, the vote came split down the ideological line, making Justice Kennedy the swing vote that gave same-sex couples eligibility for federal benefits.

The U.S. House of Representatives, which is voted into office by Americans to represent their best interests, has voted to defend DOMA, but now neither the Congress’ vote or the ‘peoples’ has been rendered baseless by the high court. In other words, your vote doesn’t matter.

Justice Scalia dissented by saying that this ruling by the court took away the peoples right to decide if they marriage should be between one man and one woman.

Now the court has ruled to vacate the 9th Circuit Court’s decision on California’s controversial Prop 8, making the same-sex lawful in California, even when Californians voted in favor of Proposition 8.

The Defense of Marriage Act, signed into law in 1996, restricted access to federal marriage benefits and interstate marriage recognition to heterosexual couples. In 2011, President Barack Obama instructed his Department of Justice to stop defending the law after its constitutionality was challenged in the Second Circuit Appeals Court.

DOMA’s Section 3, which restricts same-sex couples’ access to shared public employee benefits, estate taxes, and ability to file for bankruptcy, has previously been found unconstitutional in eight federal courts including the First and Second Circuit Courts of Appeal.

In March, President Bill Clinton said he regretted signing that law ahead of his bid for reelection. He urged the Supreme Court to overturn the law which he called “discriminatory.”-Mediate

Rep. Michele Bachmann put out his statement regarding the court’s DOMA ruling-

“Marriage was created by the hand of God. No man, not even a Supreme Court, can undo what a holy God has instituted.

“For thousands of years of recorded human history, no society has defended the legal standard of marriage as anything other than between man and woman. Only since 2000 have we seen a redefinition of this foundational unit of society in various nations.

“Today, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to join the trend, despite the clear will of the people’s representatives through DOMA.

“What the Court has done will undermine the best interest of children and the best interests of the United States.”

Expect to see the feather boa brigade jubilantly jumping up and down, now that their same-sex marriage initiative, which the majority of Americans have rejected at the ballot box, has been legitimized by an activist court.

Also, expect to now see  lawsuits filed against religious institutions who refuse to perform same-sex marriages. This is only the beginning…

Share and “Like” the story below, leave us a comment.  

Want to keep in the loop?
Sign up now, and don't miss a thing.

About author

Javier Manjarres
Javier Manjarres

As the managing editor of The Shark Tank, Javier was awarded the 2011 CPAC Blogger of the Year. Countless videos and articles from the Shark Tank have been featured on Fox News, The Hill, Wall Street Journal, and other national news publications. Javier has also appeared on Univision’s “Al Punto” and numerous radio shows, including being the weekly 92.5 Fox News' DayBreak with Drew Steele political contributor, as well as one of NewsmaxTV's conservative commentators. Javier has also authored "BROWN PEOPLE," which is a book about Hispanic Politics. Learn more at

Related Articles

Leave a Comment

  • BoGo

    “Justice Scalia descented…”

    I think you mean “dissent”, ’cause this whole thing stinks.

    As far as next steps, equally likely as lawsuits against religious institutions is the push now for plural marriage (hooray shariah) and the lowering of the legal age limit (hooray NAMBLA).

    Heck, maybe even the PETA people step up to promote cross-species marriage.

    But of course, we were just crazy for warning about the slippery slope.

    • Javier Manjarres

      Thanks, too many thoughts going through my head. Dissent was what I meant to type

  • surfcat50

    Muslim polygamy, including child brides, is next: we can’t discriminate against them, now can we?

  • SOmom

    “Also, expect to now see lawsuits filed against religious institutions who refuse to perform same-sex marriages. ”

    Poppycock! I’m already married, but let’s say I wasn’t. I don’t have a “right” to get married in a Jewish synagogue just because I have the right to get married. I’m not Jewish and they could turn my future spouse and I away because I do not hold to their beliefs, and they could do so without repercussions. Or perhaps I’m a twice divorced Catholic.. the church does not (and would not) have to perform my third wedding ceremony. And please- the majority of Americans do NOT reject same-sex marriage. Gallup polls, Pew Research polls, Quinippiac polls…all show the majority of Americans agree with same-sex marriage rights. Even Fox’s own poll does not come out with a majority against it and puts a 46% approval, and a 46% disapproval on the issue when polling viewers. And historically, those numbers demonstrate far greater approval than was present at the time of the passing of the Civil Rights Act which clarified the right that YOU, Mr. Manjarres, have to be treated equally. So I guess even if polls DID show that the majority of Americans were opposed to same-sex marriage we can be thankful that while we humans do very bad things to each other, sometimes just the right number of people step up and stop it. Otherwise we may not have ever had the chance to hear you blather your hypocritical and ironic discriminatory opinions.

    • BoGo

      Riiight, Just like the administration isn’t forcing religious institutions to cover abortion in their health plans, even though it goes against their beliefs. Or why Catholic Charities no longer provides adoptions in Massachusetts because they were being forced to adopt to gay couples against their beliefs. Or how about the photographer that was sued in AZ because she would photograph a gay wedding.

      And please don’t use big words you don’t understand. There’s nothing at all hypocritical or ironic in what Javier posted.

      • DebraP

        How unfortunate that SOmom (maybe that stands for “sorry one”) didn’t think before posting. Ah well, we all do it at some time or another…

        What’s ironic, is that this is Javier’s blog and nowhere does he say that everyone must share the same opinions as his and yet, someone quickly defending the feather boa brigade demands that he MUST share THEIR opinion. How typical of those who believe in that mythical land of utopia! snicker, snicker….

    • Kathy

      You are right. Gays can demand a civil ceremony but to try to force a religion to marry them is impossible. There are rules governing marriage that are purely religious and any religion can invoke their right against anyone trying to interfere with their religious beliefs and practices. You will NEVER see a gay marriage in an LDS temple. They will be torn down before that will happen and faithful members will travel to Mexico or Canada where there are temples not affected by this hideous change in law without any input from the public. I say let them have civil unions if they want but NOT marriage. This is a purely religious ceremony designed by God for one man and one woman. This is just a sign of the end of times and a heads up that the end of days is right around the corner. It is also a sign that we need to rethink the survival of the Supreme Court when they violate the Constitution on a regular basis.

      • MrMidnyte

        I believe you are wrong in this situation. If you, as a church refuse to provide marriage services for me, a citizen. I file a discrimination law suit against you. A liberal judge say yes you are discriminating against me. They take away your ability to perform the legal marriages reserving that ability to Justices of the Peace and Notary Public’s for government sanctioned marriages.

        • BoGo

          That’s coming.

          But the first ones to feel the heat will be military chaplains.

        • http://google Ken

          Sorry , but we would refuse to marry two men or two women .It is against our church constitution which was adopted for this reason 20 years ago .The bible is clear about this and just because you are perverted does not mean you will have the right to change it. .If this would be true then I want to marry my little dog Buddy .

  • E

    Conservatives cannot possibly spout off about how much they love freedom while trying to stop others from exercising the freedom to be with the person they love. If you do, then you have no credibility whatsoever.

    • DebraP

      Whoa! Before going and getting your panties all twisted, maybe you should actually read the article. No one is saying you can’t be with your loved one. In fact, I hope you go, GO right now to be with your loved one..go ahead, we’ll wait *sarc*

      Meanwhile, there are far more important issues to be concerned with than your love life…for instance, Obama invited a known terrorist and America hater into the White House (Sheik Abdullah Bin Bayya). Obama won’t allow law abiding Americans and their children to tour the White House but hey, if you’re a terrorist and want to kill us, then you’d be a friend of Obama so come on in! WTF?? Good luck with your date nite.

  • MrMidnyte

    Do not hink for a minute that the gay community will stop here. They will try to force churches to conduct marriage ceremonies for gay couples, then file lawsuits against the ones that refuse for discrimination. Their goal will be to take marriage out of church and put it in governments hands. One more example of how the godless and wicked try to take God away from the faithful. The next step will be to get the age of consent lowered as NAMBLA did in New York state when they passed their gay marriage legiclation. NAMBLA wants to have the age of consent lowered to 13.

  • Lightweight

    Marriage was not created by the “hand of God” it was created by the Heart of God.Marriage is a religious act not ordained by the government,little g. Bachman as always is a politlcal mercenary has something to say to gain points after the fact.We needed her efforts before.She did this show up late on Obama’s birth cerificate and the confirmation of Hillary’s muslum sisterhood confirmation.

  • Pingback: Rick Scott: Florida is a “Traditional Marriage State” - WatchdogWire - Florida()