Comments on: Couples make history testifying against DOMA

By: Emily

Emily — Fri, 05 Aug 2011 23:46:42 +0000

This is why I think a lot of politicians should be voted out of office; they clearly don’t care about what the people they REPRESENT want. Just their own opinions and their own paychecks. Over half the country supports same-sex marriage. And the changes that have been proposed don’t force anyone to do anything; if same-sex marriages aren’t legal in a state, they don’t have to be recognized. But as for the six states that allow it (and I live in one of them and do plan on getting married to my partner) they should have federal benefits. There shouldn’t even be any debate on it. If people work hard for their benefits, they should receive them, straight or gay. Sexuality shouldn’t matter.

By: John Leamer

John Leamer — Fri, 22 Jul 2011 21:02:41 +0000

“Grassley, who represents a state where same-sex marriage is legal, said he opposes the Respect for Marriage Act because he believes marriage should be reserved for one man and one woman.”
Apparently Sen. Grassley believes his personal opinion overrides the legislature of his state and its gay and gay supportive constituents. He also ERRONEOUSLY quotes the president of the United States….I question Mr. Grassley’s ability to govern if he gets such facts incorrect and votes against his own state’s constituents because of his personal opinions…

By: BB

BB — Fri, 22 Jul 2011 19:22:32 +0000

Boehner should be voted out of office.

By: Pamela

Pamela — Thu, 21 Jul 2011 20:18:45 +0000

I am a heterosexual Republican wife/mother/income earner. I believe that if 2 people love and are committed to eachother – and chose to enter into a civil union together – then they have the right to their own happiness. The spousal benefits that would be afforded to same sex couples would enrich the lives of citizens who are hard working contributing members of our society. If you work, pay taxes and obey the law – the government should have no right to step in to your personal life and dictate which privileges you are entitled to. If the government wants to discuss entitlements – it should focus on the social services system whereby the recipients are not necessarily contributing back to the economic pool.

By: blue-heron

blue-heron — Thu, 21 Jul 2011 15:01:52 +0000

One way forward which has not been considered, while not optimal, but moving the process in a positive direction, might be one that would amend only Part of DOMA, addressing Only the issue of Allowing Federal Recognition of those Marriages performed in States whose State Legislatures have passed Laws approving SS Marriage, and leaving the issue of Inter-State Recognition of SS Marriages alone for the time being / to be addressed at a later time.

This method would remove One concern of the Opposition of One State which has not approved SS Marraige being potentially required to acknowledge another State’s Legally Licensed SS Marriages.

Again, not Optimal, but potentially palatable and more readily passable, Constitutionally unargueable, in and of itself.