Quote:
|
Quote by: pubmanager However Preident Clinton and congress did seem to endorse a traditional veiw of marriage (wether christian in origin or not I guess is somewhat moot and I did not intend that point to become the basis for argument, didn't realise the point was contentious... must learn to present my thoughts more clearly)
Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS
DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT
AS INTRODUCED ON MAY 7, 1996 |
(...snip...)
First, federal DoMA only affects the definition of marriage as it applies to federal laws like federal income tax and social security. It does not speak to or effect marriage defined at the state level.
Second, federal DoMA is a law. Unfair federal laws have been overturned by acts of congress and the courts.
Third, federal DoMA has, to my knowledge, never been contested. Lawsuits from states that have approved same sex marriage will eventually wind their way thru the federal court system.
Fourth, your point about christian origin is
not moot. The fact that case documents cite "...the holy estate of matrimony..." may indeed be part of the law's undoing, since it fails the 'secular legislative purpose' test.
In summary, quoting bad (possibly unconstitutional) law, even if it
is currently the law of the land, hardly supports your position.