| Register  | FAQ  | Search | Login 
It is currently Mon Nov 24, 2014 3:05 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 6:45 pm 
Online
Dead by dawn
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:54 pm
Posts: 7987
Location: Seattle
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110223/ap_on_re_us/us_gay_marriage

Obviously, this is good, but how good? I mean, what happens now? Lawsuits challenging the DOMA work their way through the courts with no one arguing against them? If the federal DOMA is repealed do states that don't allow same sex marriage have to recognize marriages performed in the states that do (wasn't that kind of the point of the DOMA?)

Obviously I am pretty clueless as to how this all works.

_________________
facebook
"The PPK: Come for the pie; stay for the croissants." - tinglepants!
"Cockblocked by Richard Branson- again!" - Erika Soyf*cker


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 7:00 pm 
Offline
Attended Chelsea Clinton's Wedding

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:16 pm
Posts: 214
States would still be free to ignore same-sex marriages.

It deals with the other part of DOMA that defines marriage at the federal level. The best ultimate outcome is federal recognition of same-sex marriages in states where they're legal. (Thus every federal law that applies to marriage would also apply to those in same-sex marriages like joint tax filing.)

What will happen now is someone (likely the House of Representatives or an individual member) will try to get standing to try to defend the law.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 7:47 pm 
Offline
Not NOT A Furry

Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:41 pm
Posts: 460
What we need is marriage to be federally defined as between consenting adults regardless of race, religion, economic class, biological sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation. We need to disqualify it from being a states' issue - just like since the Civil War, states can't pick and choose on the issue of who qualifies as a free person and who qualifies as a slave. For that matter, we need protection for everybody (race, religion, economic class, biological sex, gender identity, sexual orientation) at a federal level that automatically and always supersedes any shiitake bigots at the state level try to get away with it (such as the mess in Arizona, with white supremacists writing laws against Latinos and Latinas, or even where I am in California, with church groups getting Proposition 8 passed).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:13 pm 
Offline
Should Write a Goddam Book Already
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:21 pm
Posts: 1066
I guess it's pretty good.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2011 2:55 pm 
Offline
Grandfathered In
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:41 pm
Posts: 9661
Location: Seattle
BFH wrote:
and always supersedes any shiitake bigots at the state level


I'm sick of those s.hitbigots.

Good band, though.

_________________
Did somebody say Keep on rockin?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Thu Feb 24, 2011 4:20 pm 
Offline
Writes Vegan Haiku

Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 4:50 pm
Posts: 32
I have nothing to add to this thread, except I kept mis-reading the title as "Dogma" and then it turned out to be something completely different.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:27 am 
Offline
Nailed to the V
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 5:36 pm
Posts: 570
Location: Bat Country
I'm against the government having anything to do with marriage in general. No matter who wants to get married. Marriage, in the personal commitment way that most people think of it, is between two people, or two people and their community, or two people and god, or three people, or whatever. Marriage should be a social institution for people define for themselves. The key feature is committed, consenting individuals. The government should not be involved. The benefits and responsibilities that come with what we now call marriage should be bunched under a different label (domestic partnership is as good as any), that should be widely available to anyone who wants to set up an integrated household. In my ideal world, marriage is based solely in individuals' commitment to one another, and domestic partnerships are a non-emotional arrangements defining a set of legal rights between individuals. People can have one, the other, or both. As far as I'm concerned, the mere existence of legal marriage is a violation of the well-established, 14th Amendment right to privacy. Okay, I'm done with my rant. Thanks for reading.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:13 pm 
Offline
Mispronounces Daiya
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:27 am
Posts: 1450
Location: Oakland
Veganismbot wrote:
I'm against the government having anything to do with marriage in general. No matter who wants to get married. Marriage, in the personal commitment way that most people think of it, is between two people, or two people and their community, or two people and god, or three people, or whatever. Marriage should be a social institution for people define for themselves. The key feature is committed, consenting individuals. The government should not be involved. The benefits and responsibilities that come with what we now call marriage should be bunched under a different label (domestic partnership is as good as any), that should be widely available to anyone who wants to set up an integrated household. In my ideal world, marriage is based solely in individuals' commitment to one another, and domestic partnerships are a non-emotional arrangements defining a set of legal rights between individuals. People can have one, the other, or both. As far as I'm concerned, the mere existence of legal marriage is a violation of the well-established, 14th Amendment right to privacy. Okay, I'm done with my rant. Thanks for reading.


Except for Mormons trying to marry teenage girls. That shiitake is forked. (But also not related to this. Yay, getting rid of DOMA!)

_________________
Formerly herbstsonne


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 2:38 pm 
Offline
Semen Strong
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:10 pm
Posts: 19200
Location: Cliffbar NJ
Quote:
Tell Congress: Don't defend DOMA. Repeal it!

Since President Obama's announcement, every major right-wing group has demanded that Congress defend DOMA. They're saying Obama's decision will "force homosexual marriage on all 50 States" and is "subverting the constitution." But discrimination isn't part of our constitution! Why can't legally married same-sex couples file their taxes together, access each other's Social Security survivors' benefits, or sponsor one another for immigration? Because of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

To capitalize on this opportunity, we need to do more than just keep Republican leaders from defending DOMA – we need Congress to get rid of it once and for all.

Bills to repeal DOMA are about to be introduced in Congress, and they need more support.

Sign here Once you click on it a big banner comes up saying "Tell Congress Not to Defend DOMA" Click on that and it takes you to the petition.

_________________
My oven is bigger on the inside, and it produces lots of wibbly wobbly, cake wakey... stuff. - The PoopieB.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 2:54 pm 
Offline
Nailed to the V
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 5:36 pm
Posts: 570
Location: Bat Country
maygles wrote:
Veganismbot wrote:
I'm against the government having anything to do with marriage in general. No matter who wants to get married. Marriage, in the personal commitment way that most people think of it, is between two people, or two people and their community, or two people and god, or three people, or whatever. Marriage should be a social institution for people define for themselves. The key feature is committed, consenting individuals. The government should not be involved. The benefits and responsibilities that come with what we now call marriage should be bunched under a different label (domestic partnership is as good as any), that should be widely available to anyone who wants to set up an integrated household. In my ideal world, marriage is based solely in individuals' commitment to one another, and domestic partnerships are a non-emotional arrangements defining a set of legal rights between individuals. People can have one, the other, or both. As far as I'm concerned, the mere existence of legal marriage is a violation of the well-established, 14th Amendment right to privacy. Okay, I'm done with my rant. Thanks for reading.


Except for Mormons trying to marry teenage girls. That shiitake is forked. (But also not related to this. Yay, getting rid of DOMA!)


I'm totally with you. Naturally, other laws not related to marriage stay in force. So if your concept of marriage involves statutory rape, child abuse, or false imprisonment, you're still going to prison.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:00 pm 
Offline
Semen Strong
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:10 pm
Posts: 19200
Location: Cliffbar NJ
I agree with you Vegansimbot. When I was in law school one of my family law professors was proposing a shift in the way we structure receipt of government benefits. Instead of tying them to a male/female partnership, she proposed tying them to a caregiver/caretaker model - so no matter who is caring for whom, they can claim benefits, protections, rights to make legal decisions etc, whether it is an adult child caring for an aging parent, a father caring for children etc.

_________________
My oven is bigger on the inside, and it produces lots of wibbly wobbly, cake wakey... stuff. - The PoopieB.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 8:25 pm 
Offline
Semen Strong
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:10 pm
Posts: 19200
Location: Cliffbar NJ
The Onion: http://www.theonion.com/articles/maraud ... -ci,19325/

_________________
My oven is bigger on the inside, and it produces lots of wibbly wobbly, cake wakey... stuff. - The PoopieB.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:23 am 
Offline
Nailed to the V
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 5:36 pm
Posts: 570
Location: Bat Country
Tofulish wrote:
I agree with you Vegansimbot. When I was in law school one of my family law professors was proposing a shift in the way we structure receipt of government benefits. Instead of tying them to a male/female partnership, she proposed tying them to a caregiver/caretaker model - so no matter who is caring for whom, they can claim benefits, protections, rights to make legal decisions etc, whether it is an adult child caring for an aging parent, a father caring for children etc.



Interesting. I like that. The way so many rules are written right now trying to find which rules apply to which families is kinda like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:17 am 
Offline
Inflexitarian
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:10 pm
Posts: 751
Location: Virginia, USA
BFH wrote:
What we need is marriage to be federally defined as between consenting adults regardless of race, religion, economic class, biological sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation. We need to disqualify it from being a states' issue - just like since the Civil War, states can't pick and choose on the issue of who qualifies as a free person and who qualifies as a slave. For that matter, we need protection for everybody (race, religion, economic class, biological sex, gender identity, sexual orientation) at a federal level that automatically and always supersedes any shiitake bigots at the state level try to get away with it (such as the mess in Arizona, with white supremacists writing laws against Latinos and Latinas, or even where I am in California, with church groups getting Proposition 8 passed).

Perfectly put.

_________________
Geeks make the world go 'round

Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/GeekKnowledge


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: DOMA is legally indefensible
PostPosted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:54 pm 
Offline
Chip Strong
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:37 pm
Posts: 998
Location: Oaktizzle
Tofulish, have you read any of Nancy Polikoff's stuff? I have her book, but haven't read it yet. I do read her blog a lot though. Anyway, she talks about legal recognition for different family types, marriage promotion by the state, and how our marriage laws tend to favor specific types of couples, specifically single breadwinner households with higher income levels.
She was also one of the authors of the Beyond Marriage statement.
http://www.beyondmarriage.org/full_statement.html
And here's her blog:
http://beyondstraightandgaymarriage.blogspot.com/

_________________
Goddamn that Rick Santorum has a pretty mouth. -sameness


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Erika Soyf*cker and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Template made by DEVPPL/ThatBigForum and fancied up by What Cheer