Print
E-mail
House Introduces Legislation to Repeal DOMA
 |
| Dozens of proponents attended a rally at the Capitol in Austin, Texas, on Wednesday, Feb. 14, 2001, in support of Texas House Bill 496, the Defense of Marriage Act, which would limit marriages to heterosexual unions. House Democrats recently introduced legislation to repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act. (Deborah Cannon/Associated Press) |
Pro-Family Advocates Cry Foul
By JOE MURRAY, The Bulletin
House Democrats introduced legislation this week to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and federally recognize lawfully performed same-sex marriages; a move which conservatives claim is an attack on the institution of marriage.
Sponsored by U.S. Reps. Jerrold Nadler, D-NY, Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisc., and Jared Polis, D-Colo., the Respect for Marriage Act would mandate all lawful marriages receive equal treatment under the law.
If passed, same-sex couples would be entitled to the same federal rights and benefits enjoyed by opposite-sex couples.
“The full repeal of DOMA is long overdue,” said Rep. Nadler. “When DOMA was passed in 1996, its full harm may not have been apparent to all Members of Congress because same-sex couples were not yet able to marry. It was a so-called ‘defense’ against a hypothetical harm.”
Mr. Nadler continued, “Now, in 2009, we have tens of thousands of married same-sex couples in this country, living openly, raising families and paying taxes in states that have granted them the right to marry, and it has become abundantly clear that, while the sky has not fallen on the institution of marriage, as DOMA supporters had claimed, DOMA is causing these couples concrete and lasting harm. Discrimination against committed couples and stable families is terrible federal policy.”
Democrats argue the fact that some states permission of same-sex marriages in U.S. means DOMA has become a discriminatory pierce of legislation by denying same-sex couples federal benefits.
“It (DOMA) does real harm by denying thousands of lawfully-married same-sex couples the federal rights and benefits that only flow through marriage,” said Joe Solmonese, President of the Human Rights Campaign.
“Many of these include the protections couples turn to in times of need, like Social Security survivors’ benefits, medical leave to care for an ailing spouse and equal treatment under U.S. immigration laws.”
House Republicans say Democrats were attempting to interfere with state’s rights and redefine traditional marriage. It was also claimed the Respect for Marriage Act was a direct assault on the nation’s Judeo-Christian values.
“The Defense of Marriage Act was signed into law 13 years ago by a Democratic President because lawmakers began to see the assault on traditional marriage,” said U.S. Rep. Paul Broun, M.D., R-Ga.
“Over a decade later, traditional marriage, a principle tenant in our Judeo-Christian values, is under assault more than ever before. This is why I was extremely disappointed to see my liberal colleagues introduce legislation today to repeal the bipartisan Defense of Marriage Act.”
But supporters of the Respect for Marriage Act note that since former President Bill Clinton signed DOMA over a decade ago, he has re-evaluated their position.
“When the Defense of Marriage Act was passed, gay couples could not marry anywhere in the United States or the world for that matter. Thirteen years later, the fabric of our country has changed, and so should this policy,” Mr. Clinton said in a statement supporting the DOMA repeal.
In mounting an opposition to the Respect for Marriage Act, pro-family supporters say the repeal of DOMA could open the floodgates and lead to numerous states that oppose same-sex marriage to being forced to recognize it. DOMA protects states from being forced to recognize same-sex marriages performed in another jurisdiction.
“If DOMA falls, the door will be wide open for activist judges to order one state after another to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states,” said American Family Association spokesman Ed Vitagliano.
“In all 30 states where natural marriage has been put to a vote, American citizens have voted decisively to protect the institution of marriage as it has been understood since the dawn of time. This is no time for Congress to trample on the will of the people and create the likelihood that they will be forced to accept values they have rejected at the ballot box.”
And, in an unlikely turn of events, conservatives are finding an ally in U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., an openly gay lawmaker.
Mr. Frank has stated he cannot back Mr. Nadler’s bill because of a provision that could be viewed as exporting marriage. That is, as the legislation is written, same-sex couples who lawfully wed in one state could receive federal benefits even if their state of residence does not recognize same-sex marriage. Mr. Frank cannot support the bill because it also comes at a time when the House should be focusing on other gay rights issues. Mr. Frank believes opponents could use this to distort the equal rights issue.
“For perhaps the first time in history, the AFA is urging members of Congress to listen to Barney Frank,” said Bryan Fischer, AFA’s Director of Issues Analysis.
Joe Murray can be reached at jmurray@thebulletin.us
Sponsored by U.S. Reps. Jerrold Nadler, D-NY, Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisc., and Jared Polis, D-Colo., the Respect for Marriage Act would mandate all lawful marriages receive equal treatment under the law.
If passed, same-sex couples would be entitled to the same federal rights and benefits enjoyed by opposite-sex couples.
“The full repeal of DOMA is long overdue,” said Rep. Nadler. “When DOMA was passed in 1996, its full harm may not have been apparent to all Members of Congress because same-sex couples were not yet able to marry. It was a so-called ‘defense’ against a hypothetical harm.”
Mr. Nadler continued, “Now, in 2009, we have tens of thousands of married same-sex couples in this country, living openly, raising families and paying taxes in states that have granted them the right to marry, and it has become abundantly clear that, while the sky has not fallen on the institution of marriage, as DOMA supporters had claimed, DOMA is causing these couples concrete and lasting harm. Discrimination against committed couples and stable families is terrible federal policy.”
Democrats argue the fact that some states permission of same-sex marriages in U.S. means DOMA has become a discriminatory pierce of legislation by denying same-sex couples federal benefits.
“It (DOMA) does real harm by denying thousands of lawfully-married same-sex couples the federal rights and benefits that only flow through marriage,” said Joe Solmonese, President of the Human Rights Campaign.
“Many of these include the protections couples turn to in times of need, like Social Security survivors’ benefits, medical leave to care for an ailing spouse and equal treatment under U.S. immigration laws.”
House Republicans say Democrats were attempting to interfere with state’s rights and redefine traditional marriage. It was also claimed the Respect for Marriage Act was a direct assault on the nation’s Judeo-Christian values.
“The Defense of Marriage Act was signed into law 13 years ago by a Democratic President because lawmakers began to see the assault on traditional marriage,” said U.S. Rep. Paul Broun, M.D., R-Ga.
“Over a decade later, traditional marriage, a principle tenant in our Judeo-Christian values, is under assault more than ever before. This is why I was extremely disappointed to see my liberal colleagues introduce legislation today to repeal the bipartisan Defense of Marriage Act.”
But supporters of the Respect for Marriage Act note that since former President Bill Clinton signed DOMA over a decade ago, he has re-evaluated their position.
“When the Defense of Marriage Act was passed, gay couples could not marry anywhere in the United States or the world for that matter. Thirteen years later, the fabric of our country has changed, and so should this policy,” Mr. Clinton said in a statement supporting the DOMA repeal.
In mounting an opposition to the Respect for Marriage Act, pro-family supporters say the repeal of DOMA could open the floodgates and lead to numerous states that oppose same-sex marriage to being forced to recognize it. DOMA protects states from being forced to recognize same-sex marriages performed in another jurisdiction.
“If DOMA falls, the door will be wide open for activist judges to order one state after another to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states,” said American Family Association spokesman Ed Vitagliano.
“In all 30 states where natural marriage has been put to a vote, American citizens have voted decisively to protect the institution of marriage as it has been understood since the dawn of time. This is no time for Congress to trample on the will of the people and create the likelihood that they will be forced to accept values they have rejected at the ballot box.”
And, in an unlikely turn of events, conservatives are finding an ally in U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., an openly gay lawmaker.
Mr. Frank has stated he cannot back Mr. Nadler’s bill because of a provision that could be viewed as exporting marriage. That is, as the legislation is written, same-sex couples who lawfully wed in one state could receive federal benefits even if their state of residence does not recognize same-sex marriage. Mr. Frank cannot support the bill because it also comes at a time when the House should be focusing on other gay rights issues. Mr. Frank believes opponents could use this to distort the equal rights issue.
“For perhaps the first time in history, the AFA is urging members of Congress to listen to Barney Frank,” said Bryan Fischer, AFA’s Director of Issues Analysis.
Joe Murray can be reached at jmurray@thebulletin.us
 |
 |
|
| Specter Supports EFCA After Pledging Not To | Obama Nominates Outspoken Abortion Supporter To Legal Post |
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of thebulletin.us.
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
