"Government recognition of same-sex marriage shouldn't infringe on faiths which teach that marriage is reserved for the union of a man and a woman. Religious creeds would, and should, remain free to identify what they do or don't choose to consecrate as marriages. The tolerance and acceptance we're advocating should reach beyond this religious realm — and should flow in two directions: Remember, for many Americans, opposition to gay marriage isn't synonymous with opposition to gays. It is, instead, rooted in their belief of what should constitute marriage.If a religious organization chooses not to solemnize a same-sex marriage, the state shouldn't force it to.
Obama was sensible to say the issue should be decided at the state level. Over time, it's safe to bet, more and more states will embrace the idea.
What should be done at the federal level is to repeal the provision of the Defense of Marriage Act barring federal recognition of same-sex marriages. That policy deprives same-sex spouses of the benefits of marriage in everything from Social Security to immigration to income taxes. Washington ought to let states decide who may marry — and then treat every spouse as a spouse."
DOMA should be repealed and the federal government should recognize same-sex unions that are legal in the states where they were performed.
Just as a fun fact, this position contrasts sharply with Mitt Romney's position on marriage. He has signed the pledge of the anti-equality National Organization for Marriage (NOM), vowing to support a federal marriage amendment, to defend DOMA, and to establish a commission to
No word on whether Romney will support a commission for people who are bullied for being gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, or gender non-conforming. But he guesses he's sorry if any people are offended by that.
No comments:
Post a Comment