Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The SC striking down a key provision of DOMA, means that states that allow gay marriage can have their married gay couples receive federal benefits.
Aren't conservatives for state's rights?
DOMA had nothing to do with State's rights. I am a conservative, and I have always opposed DOMA since the day it was enacted into law. Not because of State Rights, but rather because it blatantly violated the "Full Faith & Credit Clause" of the US Constitution. Marriage is a public act, and all lawful public acts of one State must be recognized under the law by every other State. That does not mean other States are required to permit same-sex marriages. It only means that if a State does legally allow same-sex marriages then every other State must recognize same-sex marriages from that State and treat it no differently than any other marriage under the law.
I do not care whether Republicans or Democrats enact a law, if it violates the US Constitution I will oppose it.
Social Conservatives like Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and 2/3rd of the Democrats in the House and Senate in 1996 -- I suppose they may be social conservatives by 2013 standards.
Mores change, popular opinion changes. Progressives change with them while conservatives don't. That is the essence of being a conservative.
Social Conservatives like Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and 2/3rd of the Democrats in the House and Senate in 1996 -- I suppose they may be social conservatives by 2013 standards.
A lot of that support was caused by the very real concern that the social conservatives would have the ability to push through a federal constitutional amendment instead. It was a stopgap measure to keep the right wing nutbags from doing something that couldn't be fixed later.
A lot of that support was caused by the very real concern that the social conservatives would have the ability to push through a federal constitutional amendment instead. It was a stopgap measure to keep the right wing nutbags from doing something that couldn't be fixed later.
There was absolutely no chance of getting a proposed constitutional amendment passed banning same-sex marriage. It was never a concern by anyone with a modicum of intelligence. DOMA was an incredibly feeble attempt to bypass the US Constitution, and it failed.
most conservatives are also for lower taxes. the greedy money hungry welfare craving gays just went and cost us a fortune.
Don't gays pay taxes too? It's extremely hypocritical of you to complain against that when gays are paying taxes to support your heterosexual benefits. Equality means "Equality for Everyone"
Some conservatives (such as me) don't think the federal government has any role in defining what marriage is or isn't. So I think DOMA should have never existed and the SCOTUS ruling was correct.
Because I don't think marriage is a federal issue, the 14th Amendment shouldn't apply. If marriage itself were not protected by the Constitution, then "equal protection" is not an issue. If marriage is not a federal issue, it shouldn't be in the tax code. It shouldn't matter to the feds what states do or don't do about marriage. Traditional marriage related issues such as inheritance could and should be handled purely as civil matters.
Republicans are not necessarily conservatives.
Be careful what you wish for. Are you and other hets willing to spend $$ on lawyers to settle your "civil matters"? Most people have no idea how many benefits are allotted to them on account of marriage.
There was absolutely no chance of getting a proposed constitutional amendment passed banning same-sex marriage. It was never a concern by anyone with a modicum of intelligence. DOMA was an incredibly feeble attempt to bypass the US Constitution, and it failed.
35 states currently have either laws or constitutional amendments that ban same-sex marriage. That is only three states short of the 3/4 it requires to ratify an amendment to the US Constitution. It might not have been easy to pull off, but it is inaccurate to say that there was absolutely no chance it would happen. All it would take is a Republican President with a GOP majority in Congress and the support of the existing anti-gay states. Not really as hard to imagine as you seem to think.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.