Comments on: House defense committee to vote on anti-gay amendments

By: PAULinDC

PAULinDC — Tue, 10 May 2011 20:44:25 +0000

… and it abridges the rights of the couple to worship according to their own sprituality.

By: Joel

Joel — Tue, 10 May 2011 19:19:41 +0000

DOMA says the federal government cannot recognize a same-sex marriage, but this ammendment goes MUCH further. In addition to not recognizing the marriage, it forbids a couple from even having a ceremony–whether or not it will ultimately be recognized. So, now a same-sex couple can’t even walk down an aisle in a post chapel? From these bigots’ perspectives, it’s not a marriage anyway, so what’s their problem? This amendment violates so many aspects of the Constitution.

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 10 May 2011 14:50:43 +0000

Also, the State Department (by simple order from the top) offers benefits to same-sex couples that the military doesn’t. Not the big stuff like health insurance, but access to facilities, housing or relocation assistance. That’s apparently not in violation of DOMA and no one has complained. Just shows that the law is less restrictive than many people interpret it as.

By: adx

adx — Tue, 10 May 2011 14:07:57 +0000

Poor stupid ultra-conservatives, this is why the COURT CASE on DADT repeal has NOT been closed and abandoned. The pro-gay were just waiting for you to do something like this, and the moment you try to disrupt DADT, that COURT CASE will resume and will continue to be fought. They knew it, they knew you’d try something like this and that is the specific reason that the case was NOT closed. That case is active and will continue to be fought the very second you succeed in doing anything of this sort. Have fun with that.

By: blue-heron

blue-heron — Tue, 10 May 2011 13:14:27 +0000

The IRS is now “recognizing” the common property of Spouses and Partners and THIS is not a problem as it relates to DOMA?

It is evidently a problem to recognize those marriages/partnerships when it comes to Distributing Federal Benefits and Protections.

If those relationships are recognized by the state (such as California) AND THEN the Fed/IRS “recognizes” the common property status Created By those relationships, (recognized by extension but none-the-less Recognized) then how pray tell is it any different for One Department of the Federal Gov’t (IRS), to be recognizing status created by Marital and Partnered relationships, for the purpose of tax collection in this case, but Other Departments may not recognize status Created By these relationships?

Isn’t Status likewise created in said states, which could be similarly recognized as it applies to Inheritance Tax? to Social Security? etc?

It appears as though the Fed is acknowledging status/circumventing DOMA in ONE area, but not in others.

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 10 May 2011 10:02:36 +0000

What a load of crap. I’m 100% certain that same-sex marriages have been performed on federal property before. It’s just a ceremony for FSM’s sake. DOMA doesn’t prevent ceremonies from being conducted. All it means that there won’t be -legal- recognition of the marriage. That’s an entirely different matter.

By: Thomas Alex

Thomas Alex — Tue, 10 May 2011 08:56:11 +0000

““We find it difficult to understand how the military is somehow exempt from abiding by federal law,””

Federal Law states the Government can not discriminate based on Sexual Orientation, doesn’t that contradict DADT? The US Military is exempt from Federal Law, go back to school!

By: Thomas Alex

Thomas Alex — Tue, 10 May 2011 08:50:48 +0000

““We find it difficult to understand how the military is somehow exempt from abiding by federal law,””

LMAO. The military is exempt from federal law! Did you not go to school? The US military is a separate institution not governed by federal law. Why do you think they can have their own rules that violate the US Constitution?

By: Bruce

Bruce — Tue, 10 May 2011 06:25:32 +0000

Gee, I wonder what will happen when these senators find out that the IRS is also respecting state laws by requiring (same-sex) Nevada, Washington, and California domestic partners to file according to IRS publication 555?

By: FlexSF

FlexSF — Tue, 10 May 2011 00:57:16 +0000

The bigots shall fail. The gays will live equally protected under the law. The law is where the power is, not personal opinions. The federal court system shall facilitate legal equality. Get ready!