RECENT  POSTS:  » I can't keep pretending to care about [insert activist] saying [insert ridiculous thing] » NOM president: Marriage ruling is 'Dred Scott decision of our time' » Episcopalians approve ceremonies for all legally-qualified couples » NOM's wishful (and disrespectful) thinking: SCOTUS ruling is 'illegitimate' » Focus on the Family creates itemized price list for 'saving' marriage » Fox News pays this person for his opinions » Pat Buchanan doubles down on 1983 column claiming AIDS is nature's punishment » Is NOM really going to push for a constitutional convention on marriage? » Video: Great piece from 'CBS Sunday Morning' highlights sweet success » Yes, the American marriage equality fight is over—the rest is just bluster  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

01/06/2009

Barr regrets federal Rose/Ann bar

by Jeremy Hooper

Authors are often embarrassed by their past works. Those who wrote manuals on how to survive Y2K probably look back with some face-egg. James Frey surely has some regrets about the way he presented A Million Little Pieces. And of course we all know about that late work-belying essay, Shrews Never Need Taming, that a young Billy Shakespeare wrote as an eighth grade English project.

200901060834But for former Congressman and recent Libertarian Party presidential nominee Bob Barr, it's the misguided Defense of Marriage Act (DUMBA DOMA) that he wishes he could send to the literary dustbin. This from a new Barr-penned LA Times Op-Ed:

"I can sympathize with the incoming commander in chief. And, after long and careful consideration, I have come to agree with him that the law should be repealed."
...
"I've wrestled with this issue for the last several years and come to the conclusion that DOMA is not working out as planned. In testifying before Congress against a federal marriage amendment, and more recently while making my case to skeptical Libertarians as to why I was worthy of their support as their party's presidential nominee, I have concluded that DOMA is neither meeting the principles of federalism it was supposed to, nor is its impact limited to federal law."
No defending the Defense of Marriage Act [LA Times]

Oh, and plus it's just plain mean and discriminatory. But hey, if they want to do away with it on federalism grounds, then more power to them. Just get rid of the damn thing!

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails