Comments on: Court strikes down DOMA in historic ruling

By: Solving the gay marriage gordian knot, or why you should be a libertarian | Matt Glassman

Wed, 04 Aug 2010 21:56:53 +0000

[...] any room for a partisan to stand with an ideological straight face. On one hand, you’ve got a federal court ruling that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is more or less a violation of state …and the federal respect for such sovereignty (read: liberals cheer on states’ rights and [...]

By: Eric Barreto

Eric Barreto — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 19:15:04 +0000

Tim… I’m in total agreement with you, but I just don’t see that happeneing. The Justic Department must appeal to protect the rights of Congress. Out of principal, they must appeal the District Court’s ruling. It saddens me that in 2010 we’re still talking about this.

By: Tim

Tim — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 15:43:41 +0000

Under no circumstances should the Obama Administration start an appeal of the overturning of DOMA. I am tired of hearing them say they have the obligation to defend these injustices, and now that they did this in the Federal District Court, they can honestly say they did their job and move on. Obama’s justice department doesn’t need to keep defending it in the Appeals Court or God forbid the Supreme Court, which would probably rule the opposite way in favor of inequality considering the biased antigay conservative majority on the Supreme Court. Obama must stop defending DOMA now and allow the district court’s ruling to stand.

By: SkeeterVT

SkeeterVT — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 16:29:22 +0000

Judge Tauro is wrong when he says that “only sexual orientation” differentiates married couples that can receive federal benefits and those who cannot.

Let’s not forget that GENDER also differentiates married couples that can receive federal benefits and those who cannot.

The Defense of Marriage Act (as well as all 31 state laws that bar gay and lesbian couples from marrying) not only violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, it also clashes with Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits gender-based discrimination.

Forget sexual orientation. DOMA clearly discriminates against couples who are of the same gender. Supporters of same-gender marriage should have argued all along that DOMA and similar laws impose illegal gender-based discrimination.

Of course, had the Equal Rights Amendment been ratified in the 1970s, the question of same-gender marriage would have been rendered moot. We seem to have forgotten that conservative gadfly Phyllis Schafly’s anti-ERA campaign had more to do with fear of legalized same-gender marriage than anything else she argued publicly. Homophobia, not fear of feminism, is what really killed the ERA.