Posted by Equalityworks, a resident of the Del Prado neighborhood, on May 25, 2012 at 12:08 pm
A welcome decision! Fairness and equality are principles that we base our nation's identity on, it's wonderful to see the voice of reason overcoming prejudice.
"There are 1,138 benefits, rights and protections provided on the basis of marital status in Federal law. Because the Defense of Marriage Act defines "marriage" as only a legal union between one man and one woman, same-sex couples - even if legally married in their state - will not be considered spouses for purposes of federal law."
It's an unreasonable process to change every federal law to redefine who it applies to regarding married couples and same-sex life partners. Let's call it what it is when two people commit to living sharing their lives and supporting each other - marriage.
As a Christian woman, married for 29 years, with children, I can't imagine how a same-sex couple's marriage is supposed to threaten my marriage or anything about me. That scare tactic is a pretty desperate attempt to formulate some argument against gay marriage that makes any sense. It fails.
Thanks to this judge for standing up to the hate and choosing reason.
Posted by More to the Story, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on May 25, 2012 at 12:15 pm
Since the article makes a big deal about Republicans getting involved, it should at least try to balance the facts... IE The Obama administration refused to have Federal Attorney's defend DOMA, even though DOMA is existing Federal Law. This is why other Federally elected officials stepped into this matter.
Posted by Equalityworks, a resident of the Del Prado neighborhood, on May 25, 2012 at 3:45 pm
?? @More to the Story.....It says right in the article "The group, known as the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, is made up of the five top leaders of the House of Representatives. It stepped into both the cases before White and Wilken after the Obama Administration said last year it will no longer defend DOMA." So, it already contains the fact you supply.
He acted on the advice of the Attorney General, because new lawsuits filed against the act challenged it in jurisdictions without precedent on whether sexual-orientation classifications are subject to rational basis review or whether they must satisfy some form of heightened scrutiny. Under the "heightened scrutiny" the administration would have to argue for or against the constitutionality of section 3 of DOMA, and the language in that section doesn't hold up well to a constitutional challenge re:equal protection under the law. It is not uncommon for the federal administration to chose not to defend a lawsuit that is likely to be fail. Waiting until lawsuits have worked their way through lower courts is also a good idea.