Defense of marriage law?

[Julie]

ok so i jusr wikied the DOMA of '96 (was there another in 2008 or something?) but what is it really?? from what i get, it says that the goverenments dont have to validates marriages if they dont want to.....(right?) ....(anyone else think this si stupid biases and stupid?)

 

[Kenito]

The "Holy" part of marriage is completely up to each church to decide for themselves without government interference.

The "civil" part of marriage is what we are talking about. As long as the government is involved then the constitution applies.

It has already been established that "separate but equal" is not constitutional. So saying that one class of people can get married, but another has to get a civil union is not equal. The 14th Amendment to the constitution demands "equal protection under the law." The only way that same sex couples can be treated equally is to grant them marriage.

It would be great if this were something that each state could decide themselves. But the US constitution will prevail if a state adopts something unconstitutional, as has happened. That's why DOMA will eventually fall. Marriage equality will eventually be granted to all.

So it is written, so it shall be.

 

[Highway]

I think the government should stay out of marriages for any sexual orientation. In theory I think government laws were made to encourage the family unit in the community as a way to reward. The reward is in of it self and people don't need the government to tell them officially what they are doing is "OK".

As with most laws people will exploit or the intent will be perverted and we get the state of marriage where it is today. Marriage is rife with divorce and some of it probably caused by the rush to get married due to various benefits...