Friday, April 18, 2008


I do not dislike gays - for the most part I don't even know who is and who isn't, as I don't get into other people's personal lives, but marriage should not be re-defined. I know some of their concerns include benefits - then fix that problem; don't re-define the institution of marriage, basic to family. Anyone who knows me knows I believe everyone should have health care benefits and we need to start from scratch designing a better system. But changing the definition of marriage for such reasons is radical and stupid, with potential negative effects nobody can even predict at this point. If there are other forms of discrimination, such as "next of kin" issues, then we should address that as well. But don't mess with marriage.

From the Alliance for Marriage:

Days before a crucial Pennsylvania primary vote, Democrat Presidential frontrunner Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) disclosed in an interview that, if President, he would seek to repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). While Obama voted against the act in 1996, the new revelation underscored his strong opposition to the law. After learning of the Senator’s position, the Alliance for Marriage Foundation (AFMF) called on him to re-evaluate the law’s importance and consider a reversal. The Senator made the comments this week in an interview with The Advocate Magazine.

“The Defense of Marriage Act is a critical law that enjoyed broad bipartisan support and was signed into law by President Clinton. While we were concerned about Senator Obama’s opposition to the legislation in 1996, we are terribly concerned with what appears to be outright hostility to the law as it stands today, 12 years after being enacted. Without this law, states would be completely vulnerable to the imposition of other state laws on marriage. In essence, Senator Obama is telling the 27 states which have passed constitutional amendments protecting marriage that their support is wrong and should be overturned. We hope Senator Obama will reconsider and not repeal this good law should he become President,” said Niger Innis, spokesman for the Congress of Racial Equality.

Pepperdine Law Professor Douglas Kmiec told ABC News the following: "Certainly, I think it would be fair to say that it would be more likely for a court decision to impose the recognition of same-sex marriage from Massachusetts on another state in the event of the repeal of D.O.M.A."

Opponents of the AFMF Federal Marriage Amendment regularly cite DOMA as the reason why an amendment is unnecessary. Senator Obama is also opposed to the AFMF Federal Marriage Amendment.

“Senator Obama would not only turn back the clock, he would turn the country upside down on the issue of defining marriage. Despite his message of unification, repealing this very good law with widespread support would be a very damaging and divisive course of action,” said Innis.

Last month, AFMF wrote to both the Republican and Democratic parties to include language supporting the Marriage Protection Amendment in their 2008 platforms. AFMF is also sponsoring a major rally for marriage with Hispanic voters at the Democratic National Convention in Denver this August.

The Alliance for Marriage and Alliance for Marriage Foundation are non-partisan coalitions whose Board of Advisors include Rev. Walter Fauntroy — the DC Coordinator for the March on Washington for Martin Luther King Jr. — as well as other civil rights leaders, religious leaders and national legal experts.

No comments:

Post a Comment

This blog does not allow anonymous comments. Please identify yourself. Thanks!