The time has come to repeal the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Enacted 13 years ago when the idea of same sex marriage was struggling for acceptance, the Act is a relic of a more tradition-bound time and culture.
Connecticut, Iowa, and Massachusetts have already passed laws recognizing same sex marriage and other states are moving in that direction. The states are the proper forum to address this divisive social and moral issue, not the Federal Government with a law that attempts to set one national standard for marriage.
Prohibition showed just how difficult it is to enforce law establishing standards of personal behavior or morality. Coercion, whether civic or legal, in matters of this kind rarely works. It certainly won't halt public controversy surrounding the issue.
The repeal of DOMA is one step among several designed to fully integrate and protect the rights of gays and lesbians in American society. Recently enacted hate crimes legislation is another. The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act (S 909), which I sponsored with the late Senator Kennedy, makes it a federal crime to target victims on the basis of disability, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity. President Obama has said he will sign the measure.
Nothing in the Act impedes the lawful expression of one's political or religious beliefs. All Americans are entitled to hold and express their own beliefs, no matter how provocative. At the same time, no person has the right to engage in violent acts of hate or incite to violence. Protecting Americans against such hate crimes does not inhibit free speech but rather serves us all by halting and penalizing those who carry out those acts of cruelty.
Measures to combat discrimination against gays and transgendered people in the workplace are another needed measure. The Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009, of which I am an original cosponsor, was introduced on August 5, 2009 and is currently before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Finally, the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy is outdated, and should be rescinded entirely. A person's sexual orientation has no bearing on their ability to serve their country in the armed services. Countless studies and the experiences of gays who have served in the military have borne out these findings.
Judy Shepard: Creating Matt's Legacy
And that's where you lost me. It took the courts and the federal government to cram desegregation down the states' throats, if you recall.
Can one Really Pretend to BE a Democrat...Seriously? We have Spector and Lieberman...Do You Reallllly TRUST them?
2. Our current obsession with PRETENDING it is not can only cause more harm than good. Nobody can be really happy living with ongoing deceit.
3. ACCEPTING this can only cause more good than harm.
Past time for Americans to be drinking our own Koolaid. This is just one of many issues that needs to be addressed honestly and openly. Thats the cultural revolution that carried Obama into office, and every American needs to be part of it.
Not sure how two people of the same sex will procreate? There has to be a second sex involved. Adoption seems much more likely. Either way, go back to point one. Whats the harm? IMO There are definitely gender based role models that the children would need to have access to, but thats true for any child. Rare is the family that fits the definition of 'perfectly normal'.
My second argument is pragmatic. If DOMA had never been passed, resulting in the passage of an FMA, that FMA would have lasted for a relatively short time. DOMA cowers behind a veil of states' rights, making it a muddier issue for those who see the rights of the states as superseding the rights of citizens. FMA was so blatantly unconstitutional, so blatantly non-conservative/big government, and so blatantly expanding the power of the Federal government, that it would never have been able to stand the test of time. DOMA, on the other hand, only has a chance at being repealed because of the unique majority that the Democrats have right now.
"What needs to be prevented is them attempting to conceive children together, using their own genes. That's wasteful and unethical and is not a right."
Where are you getting THAT from? We're talking about non-related homosexuals getting married, not incest (which is something you all have been confusing for some time now). As far as biology is concerned, there is no such thing as male-male or female-female reproductivity. I guess you never graduated from a biology class in your life.
Keep the change.
We are left holding the bag