In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Defense of Marriage Act vs. US Appeals Court
Alan Rushing
Member Posts: 9,002 ✭✭
"An appeals court today struck down a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act banning federal recognition of same-sex marriage." (C&P from CNN.com)
http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/31/us/massachusetts-same-sex-marriage/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/31/us/massachusetts-same-sex-marriage/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
Comments
if they want to "protect marriage" how about something that would actually protect it...like a ban on adultery? [;)]
Good one!
if they want to "protect marriage" how about something that would actually protect it...like a ban on adultery? [;)]
That is a solid thought and valid reasoning!
That cuts through a lot of flim flam. Thanks.
The court was right to strike it down. Equal protection under the law is in the Constitution and as much as folks would love to cherry pick the Constitution, it's an all-or-none type of deal.
Totally agree. It is nice that the Country may very well be moving towards to practice more of what our Countries forefathers put on paper!
As far as I am concerned, if you and your legal-age, willing, "significant other" consider yourselves married, you're married. The government can just stfu and stay out of it. [;)] It is a matter between you and your partner, and, if you are religious, your church/temple/synagogue/whatever.
The court was right to strike it down. Equal protection under the law is in the Constitution and as much as folks would love to cherry pick the Constitution, it's an all-or-none type of deal.
Sorry, the court was not right to strike it down. Below is the reason. You will note the year that the Constitution was ratified and the year this excerpt was printed. Anyone can find additional information by searching "marriage vows 1789". Since marriage started in pre-historic times as a religious thing, it seems American government does not have jurisdiction. If queers want to hook up legally they can call it anything they want except marriage.
1789 U. S. Book of Common Prayer
THE FORM OF
SOLEMNIZATION OF MATRIMONY.
The text in the 1892 Book is essentially identical and so is not given separately; any differences are indicated.
? The laws respecting Matrimony, whether by publishing the Banns in churches, or by License, being different in the several States, every Minister is left to the direction of those laws, in every thing that regards the civil contract between the parties.
? And when the Banns are published, it shall be in the following form: I publish the Banns of Marriage between M. of ----, and N. of ----. If any of you know cause or just impediment, why these two persons should not be joined together in holy Matrimony, ye are to declare it. This is the first [second or third] time of asking.
These two rubrics printed as one until 1822.
? At the day and time appointed for Solemnization of Matrimony, the Persons to be married shall come into the body of the Church, or shall be ready in some proper house, with their friends and neighbours; and there standing together, the Man on the right hand, and the Woman on the left, the Minister shall say,
DEARLY beloved, we are gathered together here in the sight of God, and in the face of this company, to join together this Man and this Woman in holy Matrimony; which is [an honourable estate, instituted of God in the time of man's innocency, signifying unto us the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and his Church: which holy estate Christ adorned and beautified with his presence and first miracle that he wrought in Cana of Galilee, and is]* commended of Saint Paul to be honourable among all men: and therefore is not by any to be entered into unadvisedly or lightly; but reverently, discreetly, advisedly, soberly, and in the fear of God. Into this holy estate these two persons present come now to be joined. If any man can show just cause, why they may not lawfully be joined together, let him now speak, or else hereafter for ever hold his peace.
* This section added in the 1892 BCP.
The complete wedding is here:
http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/1789/Marriage_1789.htm