Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
States should regulate marriage?
Saturday, September 8, 2012 1:53 AM
GEEZER
Keep the Shiny side up
Quote:Vermont, New York, Connecticut support legal bid to strike down federal anti-gay marriage law By Associated Press, Updated: Saturday, September 8, 4:47 AM MONTPELIER, Vt. — The Vermont attorney general says the state has joined New York and Connecticut in asking a federal appeals court to rule the federal law that fails to recognize gay marriage as unconstitutional. Attorney General William H. Sorrell said in a statement Friday that the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as a legal union between a man and a woman, has deprived same-sex couples of federal benefits and unfairly discriminates against them. He said the three states filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case pending in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. The states argue that they, not the federal government, regulate marriage and family relationships and that Congress hasn’t the authority to refuse recognition of gay marriage and essentially “unmarry” couples.
Saturday, September 8, 2012 2:38 AM
CANTTAKESKY
Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: While I agree with these folks that the DOMA should go, I wonder if having a patchwork of state laws ranging from no legal same-sex relationships to full recognition of same-sex marriage for all social and legal benefits is just gonna cause confusion.
Saturday, September 8, 2012 7:17 AM
NIKI2
Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...
Sunday, September 9, 2012 1:53 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: I don't like SOME very important things being left to the states. Hell, if they were, we'd still have legal discrimination--we still have it in some states, but at least they have a hard time doing it openly.
Sunday, September 9, 2012 8:38 PM
RIONAEIRE
Beir bua agus beannacht
Sunday, September 9, 2012 11:40 PM
1KIKI
Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.
Monday, September 10, 2012 8:43 AM
Quote:There are too many federal tax and business consequences attached to the condition of marriage
Monday, September 10, 2012 8:49 AM
STORYMARK
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Unless of course people really want to undo anti-discrimination rulings and perhaps even extend them, in which case maybe states SHOULD regulate marriage.
Monday, September 10, 2012 11:27 AM
KWICKO
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: States should regulate marriage? No. There are too many federal tax and business consequences attached to the condition of marriage, leading to great federal inequalities when states have different regulations. IN ADDITION there are already Federal Supreme Court rulings forbidding state discrimination against interracial marriages for example. Unless of course people really want to undo anti-discrimination rulings and perhaps even extend them, in which case maybe states SHOULD regulate marriage.
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL