Defense of Marriage ACt – Page 2

FRC: Understanding Windsor

Apr 1, 2014JerryMarriageDefense of Marriage ACt, DOMA, Marriage, Same-Sex Marriage

Still don’t understand all the implications of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 United States v. Windsor decision? You aren’t alone.

Fortunately, Family Research Council has put together a brief report outlining the Windsor ruling–which struck part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. The report points out:

“Dissenting justices criticized the majority for its attack upon the motives behind the law. Chief Justice Roberts said that the facts are ‘hardly enough to support a conclusion that the ‘principal purpose’ of the 342 Representatives and 85 Senators who voted for it, and the President [Bill Clinton] who signed it, was a bare desire to harm’ … Justice Scalia likewise … explained that to defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to condemn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions.”

The report also addresses looming questions for state and federal agencies in the wake of the ruling.

You can read the entire report here.

Courts Will Use a Federal Equal Rights Amendment Against Marriage

Sep 5, 2013JerryMarriageDefense of Marriage ACt, Marriage, Same-Sex Marriage

Anyone who thinks states should consider ratifying the proposed Federal Equal Rights Amendment should look at what just happened in New Mexico.

A judge there took their state’s equal right amendment, worded almost identically to the proposed federal amendment, and used it to allow same-sex marriage in that state.

(more…)

Polygamists Hope to Benefit from Efforts to Redefine Marriage

Jul 5, 2013JerryMarriageDefense of Marriage ACt, Marriage, Same-Sex Marriage

Last week Family Research Council President Tony Perkins pointed out that the Supreme Court’s decision on the federal Defense of Marriage Act had absolutely no effect on state marriage laws. Thirty-eight states still had laws defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Twelve had laws defining it differently. Nothing was changed.

If homosexual activists were looking for a landmark victory redefining marriage nationwide, it didn’t come. What was interesting, however, was how emboldened polygamists were by the ruling.

(more…)