The Conservative Cave
Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: thundley4 on July 08, 2009, 01:25:21 PM
-
BOSTON – Massachusetts, the first state to legalize gay marriage, sued the U.S. government Wednesday over a federal law that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
The federal Defense of Marriage Act interferes with the right of Massachusetts to define and regulate marriage as it sees fit, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley said. The 1996 law denies federal recognition of gay marriage and gives states the right to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Boston, argues the act "constitutes an overreaching and discriminatory federal law." It says the approximately 16,000 same-sex couples who have married in Massachusetts since the state began performing gay marriages in 2004 are being unfairly denied federal benefits given to heterosexual couples.
Besides Massachusetts, five other states — Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine and Iowa — have legalized gay marriage. Gay marriage opponents in Maine said Wednesday that they had collected enough signatures to put the state's new law on the November ballot for a possible override.
The Massachusetts lawsuit challenges the section of the federal law that creates a federal definition of marriage as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife."
Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090708/ap_on_re_us/us_gay_marriage)
I wondered when this would happen. If the DOMA is overturned, that wouldn't necessarily mean that every state is going to accept a legal gay marriage from another state. However, if they press that issue later, then could not every state be sued to honor the laws of other states? Everything from gay marriage to conceal carry permits?
-
I believe it's already law that states must accept marriages from any state...that was the entire point to DOMA.
-
I believe it's already law that states must accept marriages from any state...that was the entire point to DOMA.
But not gay "marriages".
-
But not gay "marriages".
Right...that was the entire point to DOMA. If Mass. manages to force the feds to recognize gay "marriage," then DOMA will die and that will kill all the state constitutional definitions of marriage.
-
...and not too long ago, gays were saying it wasn't about marriage, it was about equal rights. :whatever:
-
Right...that was the entire point to DOMA. If Mass. manages to force the feds to recognize gay "marriage," then DOMA will die and that will kill all the state constitutional definitions of marriage.
But that could open all states up to recognizing the laws of all other states. Like I mentioned before, some states could be forced to allow conceal carry permit holders from one state to carry in any state.
The most scary part of it is though, that it sets the stage for the federal government to start making "standard" laws for all states.
-
But that could open all states up to recognizing the laws of all other states. Like I mentioned before, some states could be forced to allow conceal carry permit holders from one state to carry in any state.
The most scary part of it is though, that it sets the stage for the federal government to start making "standard" laws for all states.
The feds have made standard laws for all the states for a long time, this won't make much difference. But the thing with the gay marriage won't make much difference either. The various states have always recognized marriages performed in other states...and in other countries. DOMA was already a change from that, so changing it back won't reduce state's rights in other areas...any more than they already are.
-
...and not too long ago, gays were saying it wasn't about marriage, it was about equal rights. :whatever:
"It's not about global warming, it's about climate change."
Liberals: Always moving the goal posts regardless of the argument.
-
You have to remember that this "IS" the same bunch of idiots whose esteemed leader not to long ago wanted to know, "...what your definition of "is" is."