DOMA for Dummies

In case you don't know what "DOMA" is, it is the legislation titled, "Defense of Marriage Act," enacted in 1996. DOMA enshrines discrimination against gays and lesbians by permitting states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

Does DOMA matter? If you're in a heterosexual marriage, recognition of same sex marriages may not matter to you. Your marriage is recognized by the state and federal government, not to mention your family, friends and co-workers -- society in general. If you have one of these, you are entitled the automatic rights and privileges that go along with a civil marriage. i.e. if your spouse dies, you collect the benefits, you get the tax breaks, the hospital visitation rights and a myriad of other benefits conveyed by law. No problems, no questions asked.

When does DOMA matter? When you are in a same-sex marriage, DOMA matters. When two people are in love, share a commitment, and wish to take that next step DOMA matters... a lot. If your home state does not recognize your marriage and marital rights, same sex couples must make a choice no heterosexual couple need make. Must same-sex married couples move out of their home state, assuming their home state does not recognize their marriage? What if it was your marriage, same-sex or not? Should you and your spouse have to make the choice to move away from family, friends and job? Pack up for Massachusetts or Idaho to protect your marital rights -- you know, the over 1,100 rights and benefits currently enjoyed by heterosexual couples in all 50 states?

It's unfair and unjust to force any married couple to make this choice or suffer the consequences. The Edie Windsor case before the federal court has brought this issue to the fore. An American same-sex couple, together for four decades, married in Canada, were treated as strangers by being charged estate taxes that a heterosexual couple under identical facts and circumstances, would not be forced to pay. Basing their conclusion on this and many other similar cases, the Obama administration concluded last week that disparate treatment of same-sex marriages is unconstitutional. Hurrah!

What are the implications for future discrimination against gays and lesbians? Perhaps they will be short lived? Let's stop defending civil marriage by defining its parameters in a discriminatory manner. Let's start embracing it for what it is, a governmental -- not religious -- right that tax paying and consenting adult citizens can exercise.

 

Follow Bill Donius on Twitter: www.twitter.com/wdonius

Comments

[riles52]

03:32 PM on 03/03/2011

Couples who might benefit from DOMA being declared unconstitutional need to look at amending their 2007 returns before the statute of limitation lapases

http://riles52.blogspot.com/2011/02/amended-returns-due-to-doma-case-what.html

[Dean L Rosen]

01:05 AM on 03/03/2011

Let's start differentiating holy matrimony from (civil) marriage. When conservatives want to play the bible card to justify discrimination, let them know that they are talking about holy matrimony, a religious rite that government never addresses or interferes with. Just as there is a religious divorce that is separate from a civil divorce. For gays and lesbians the issue is about civil rights, but also about respect and dignity. It is the respect and dignity that the religious conservatives most oppose and fear. They cover this up in talking about defending marriage or saving marriage. But it is really about not allowing gays the respect of marriage. Opponents want to keep gays and lesbians marginalized. Let's get real in defining the debate.

[truth be told again]

11:17 AM on 03/05/2011

A slight correction, if I may:

"they are talking about holy matrimony, a religious rite that government never addresses or interferes with"

Actually, the government DOES "address" Holy Matrimony. It does so by recognizing and conferring ALL the rights, privileges, benefits and obligations of civil marriage on people who have this religious ceremony performed. As in, "And now, by the powers vested in me BY THE STATE ...".

Also, some (a lot?) gay couples also get married by way of this Rite. I did. Even though the US Federal government does not (cannot, under DOMA) recognize either religious OR civil marrages of gay couples. It's the "one-way Federalism" that DOMA's author, Bob Barr, now decries. This is yet another reason DOMA is UN-Constitutional. That's THREE reasons so far, this and the Equal Protections Clause and the Full Faith & Credit Clause, the application of which is denied to gay citizens.

Jpo[e thi s helps clarify things.

[truth be told again]

11:17 AM on 03/05/2011

Ooops, "Hope this clarifies things."

[Awake-and-Sing]

05:57 PM on 03/02/2011

Don't forget that DOMA also bars not just federal recognition of gay marriage even in the states where it is currently legal, It also bars federal benefits for gays and lesbians Civil Unions or Domestic Partnerships.

There has been no flip flop in the President's position. Regardless of his "evolving" personal stand on gay marriage, the President clearly ran on a platform that included a repeal of DOMA.

http://obama.3cdn.net/795174956a7f432e93_4iiemv52b.pdf

[Ioan Lightoller]

05:07 PM on 03/02/2011

Sad, isn't it, the way GLBT couples are constantly discriminated against. Why should we have to make choices that straight married do not have to make simply because they have married and their state does not have marriage equality. It's disgusting and discriminatory and the day DOMA is gone will be one of the happiest days of my life.

[Brown Buddha]

04:41 PM on 03/02/2011

My personal hypothesis on why so many conservatives oppose gay marriage is that if the law allows all people to get married regardless of sexual preference, they may have to divorce their wives and have to marry their lovers.

[be4marriage]

04:37 PM on 03/02/2011

Awesome Post!

[Texas rebel]

03:53 PM on 03/02/2011

"Must same-sex married couples move out of their home state, assuming their home state does not recognize their marriage?"

Married couples make decisions to move to another state for jobs promotions or other opportunities offered in other states. I would say that is it was that important to them than yes they should move.

"It's unfair and unjust to force any married couple to make this choice or suffer the consequences

I would also say it is unfair and unjust that is the majority of the people in a state do not want same sex marrige to force them to accept it. This issue is best left to the states. Let them vote. If a certain state does not allow or recognize same sex marrige, move to one that does.

[Bill J4321]

11:26 AM on 03/04/2011

Your opinion matters not one iota where the civil rights of your fellow human beings are concerned. Not. One. Iota.

Citizens voting on someone else's marriage rights is not even allowed under our Constitution. You and yours simply seem to feel that you do not have to follow the law where gay citizens are concerned.

You're about to get schooled. Big time.

[PhilipB]

03:05 PM on 03/04/2011

There is no will of the majority with consititution protections. There is no democracy, but a constitutional republic. It is quite fair and just that an unconstitutional law is overturned, no matter how big the majority supports it. Quite Fair and quite just.
What makes you believe you have any constitutional rights? What? What do you think makes you so deserving and so special? Answer that question honestly, something I doubt you can do as you fail to see that when you take away constitutional rights for one group of Americans your own rights are no longer protected either, and if it can happen to your neighbor it can happen to you as well.
Sounds like you need a civics class. It is a shame the ignorance of some and the bad education they received on the most fundamental aspects of how our country works.