Skip to comments.Senate committee approves bill to repeal Defense of Marriage Act
Posted on 11/10/2011 2:34:39 PM PST by NYer
WASHINGTON D.C., November 10, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) In a narrow vote Thursday morning, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill that would grant federal recognition to homosexual marriages. The bill, titled the Respect for Marriage Act, passed the Democrat controlled committee by a 10-8 vote, with the members of the committee voting along party lines.
The Respect for Marriage Act was introduced in the Senate in March by Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) with the goal of repealing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). DOMA asserts that states where homosexual marriages are not currently recognized are not required to recognize same-sex marriages from other states. It also defines marriage as the legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife for purposes of federal law.
The vote is largely symbolic as the bill is not expected to get past a Republican filibuster in the Senate, or the Republican majority in the house. Due to the unlikelihood of the bill becoming law, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) characterized the vote as no more than a cynical political gesture to the Democrats’ base.
Proponents of the Respect for Marriage Act argued today that DOMA is discriminatory towards homosexual couples because it denies them benefits reserved for married individuals, especially benefits from Social Security reserved for spouses. During the committees meeting, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) said, If youre paying the taxes, if youre fulfilling the obligations, you should get the same benefits as anybody else.
President Obama echoed these sentiments in July when the White House issued a statement supporting the bill saying, President Obama is proud to support the Respect for Marriage Act This legislation would uphold the principle that the federal government should not deny gay and lesbian couples the same rights and legal protections as straight couples.
However, during the meeting today, Sen. Grassley argued that marriage should remain defined as the union of one man and one woman because such unions provide the best environment for raising children. To me, this debate is about stable families, good environments for raising children, and religious beliefs. Its not about discriminating against anyone.
The Respect for Marriage Act has come under increasing attack this year. In February, the Justice Department announced that at the recommendation of President Obama it would no longer be defending DOMA in court, saying the President has concluded that given a number of factors, including a documented history of discrimination, classifications based on sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened standard of scrutiny.
Less than a month later, though, Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) announced that the House of Representatives would take up the defense of DOMA. In announcing the decision, Boehner said, This action by the House will ensure that this laws constitutionality is decided by the courts, rather than by the President unilaterally.
Like it is ever gonna happen ...
Its DOA. It will make it out of the House.
I mean it will never make it out of the House.
Dianne Feinstein actually had the nerve to name this bill which lacks respect for all of the marriages between man and woman for thousands of years the “ Respect for Marriage act”.
Where is the respect for the millions of real marriages. Marriages between a male and female. You Know two people who can pro-create.Two normal human beings. Two straight people who have their own genitalia they were born with.Two people who can meet face to face and have the genitals match up for normal copulation.Like God intended, and designed.
Not two fudge packers or carpet munchers.
Funny how she didn’t do this when the democlaps controlled all three houses when it would have passed...
No need to mess around in the Congress. The courts are the rulers of the USA. Packed flamer courts will undo all America stands for, EVEN IF GOP WINS THE EXECUTIVE AND CONGRESS NEXT YEAR. All the potential corrective action taken will be overturned.
If anyone sees it differently, tell me what it is.
Come on Landrieu, Pryor, Pagan Hagan, both Nelsons, the Virginia nitwits, Testor, McKaskill, you all know you are dying to vote for this!
A more accurate title would be the “Disrespect for Marriage Act”.
Love to see the voters’ reaction to this in 2012. I’ll be sitting here, dipping popcorn in humus and enjoying every minute of the show.
Gee. It’s an election year coming up. Let’s energize part of our base and p@#$ off the whole Bible Belt and the South, and then watch the bill that started it all go down in flames in the House. Yup. Then we can pose as courageous civil rights activists. Dropped muh soap. Hang on. I’ll just bend down and pick it up. Ow. My back just got thrown. Now I’m stuck this way. Help!
Dianne Feinstein actually had the nerve to name this bill which lacks respect for all of the marriages between man and woman for thousands of years the Respect for Marriage act.
Yes, it seems the RATS are very good at coming up with the very best Orwellian names for their crappy legislation. I was thinking that this would have been a good name for DOMA.
About 1% of society are sodomites and carpet munchers, and only a small percent of that 1% are or would get “married” - so let’s just go ahead and destroy children, families and society for them. Makes sense, right? Right?
at least our side stuck to what is right thus far , now they need the balls to mention this next year for the election.
True, but Feinstein will remain the champion of the Gays.
It’s like their bill to destroy the secret ballot for employees when voting on whether to unionize. “The Employee Free Choice Act”. Orwellianism at its best. The rules of Oceania would be proud.
How dare you exploit this tragedy? Those homophobic bigots voted it down, and now they’re using it to vote us out, and in the mean time, good, stable homosexual families are denied the recognition they deserve, just like the Palestinians, while the breeders get bigger tax refunds. Booohoooohooohooo!
what on earth are you on about?
Enough of this "to me," "I believe" and "I was raised as such." Such qualifiers makes this a subjective statement, which makes anyone's "feelings" right.
There is almost no other truth more OBJECTIVE than the complementarity of the two sexes as the one main qualifier for marriage.