In Looming Federalism Fight, Three States Say Feds Can’t ‘Unmarry’ Gay Couples (Guest Voice)
In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples (via The Christian Science Monitor)
Three states where members of the clergy and justices of the peace today marry gay couples argued on Friday that it’s a violation of states’ rights for the federal government to then “unmarry” those people under the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). In an amicus brief to a New York case…
Share This
Related Posts
-
Gov. Christie defends his role in publicly funded TV ads
Posted on May 18, 2013
-
Ex-Komen Official Karen Handel Announces Georgia Senate Bid
Posted on May 17, 2013
-
Am I a Home for Identities?
Posted on May 16, 2013
-
IRS tea party scandal unlikely to fade as Congress plans investigations
Posted on May 13, 2013
Here is a wild idea: how about granting the same protections to any people who want to be in union? So, for instance, if a brother and sister can live together and take the dependency tax deduction, how about two (or more) other people who also share habitation? In addition, maybe we could get rid of the insanity of having people who live together getting any different taxes (and other rights) from those who don’t?
Just sayin’
Maybe this will lead to more secession blather.
DOMA, like the Tea Party, will die a slow demographic death.
Generation X, Y, Z, and onward have all had gay friends, colleagues, or relatives.
Game over. This bantering is temporary, and it will fade soon enough.
It is illegal to transport hate across state lines.
Until it gets to the Supreme Court, it will be just like all the other legal rights guaranteed by the Constitution that one group wishes to withold from another group. The right to vote, the right to purchase birth control ,the right to rent or purchase property anywhere, miscegenation and the list goes on.
Marriage was originally concieved to protect the legal rights of the heirs of a father. Tax laws that favor married people are generally assumed to promote stability and familial responsibility. How well that works depends on the people getting married, of course. If the State decides it doesn’t matter what the relationship is and wants to base tax laws on contracts other than legal marriage contracts, they are free to do so. Civilizations change and the laws change with them. Eventually.
Think it’s bad for same-sex couples? Check out the laws for couples where one or more of the partners are trans. A drive from New York to Alabama will give these couples roughly 7 different marital statuses. Not that we need to play oppression olympics here, of course, but it illustrates pretty clearly the absolute ridiculousity behind the federalist way in which marriage is handled.
This is similar to the movement that wonders why government is in the marriage business in the first place. Have some sort of domestic partnership laws for any couple who legitimately needs to take care of each other when sick or have inheritance rights or the like. Couples can arrange their own contracts regarding money and stuff. Everything else is not really a government function.