RECENT  POSTS:  » Video: To Focus on the Family's Citizenlink, a simple business request = 'home invasion' » Audio: Former senior NOM official says we'll have 50 state equality by 2015 » Video: Florida AG Pam Bondi advocates for delayed (and denied, if she had her way) justice » Audio: Michelle Duggar robocalls against LGBT nondiscrimination ordinance in Fayetteville, AK » AFA commentator equates homosexuality with blindness, paralysis » AFA's senior issues analyst (again) equates homosexuality with necrophilia, bestiality, incest, pedophilia » 'The nation's attic' to get some rainbow-hued light » Marriage equality's main legal opponents now outsourcing fearful visions to Hollowood » GLAAD: BarbWire.com: Making the anti-LGBT movement look more extreme by the day » Right on equal rights, from the right  

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

01/09/2014

Pro-discrimination movement devises yet another go-nowhere House bill in hopes of tripping up marriage equality

by Jeremy Hooper

One of the most anti-LGBT organizations in America praises the House GOP for wasting even more legislative time before voters go to the polls in November. Here is that organization and its president, a man who has suggested that gay kids who try suicide do so because they "know" they are "abnormal, in their own words:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 9, 2014
CONTACT: J.P. Duffy or Darin Miller, (866) FRC-NEWS or (866) 372-6397

FRC Endorses State Marriage Defense Act
January 09, 2014

Legislation Addresses Administrative Chaos In Determining Marital Status

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Family Research Council (FRC) today praised U.S. Rep. Randy Weber (R-Texas) for introducing the "State Marriage Defense Act of 2014," and urged members of the House of Representatives to support it.

The State Marriage Defense Act is a response to the Supreme Court's 2013 decision in United States v. Windsor. The Court struck down as unconstitutional Section 3 of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defined marriage for all purposes under federal law as the union of one man and one woman. The plaintiff in Windsor had entered into a marriage with a person of the same sex that was recognized as legal by the state in which she lived, so the Court said that the federal government should also recognize the relationship as a marriage.

However, the Court was silent on the status of same-sex couples who may have obtained a civil marriage in one state, but who live in a state that recognizes only marriages of a man and a woman. The Obama administration has implemented guidance for some federal agencies that ignores the marriage laws of states that define marriage between a man and a woman. At the same time, other federal agencies defer to the laws of a person's state of legal residency to determine marital status for federal purposes. The State Marriage Defense Act would address this administrative chaos with a simple rule that tells the federal government to respect state determinations of the marital status of their residents when applying federal law.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins issued the following statement:

"In recent months, we have witnessed the growing serious consequences of redefining marriage. We've seen wedding florists, bakers, photographers who have been hauled into court, fined and even ordered to violate their religious beliefs by participating in same-sex weddings. And last month, a federal judge cited same-sex marriage in his decision striking down Utah's law against polygamy. Another consequence has been the Obama administration's chaotic actions through federal agencies that demonstrate total disregard for the 33 states that have not redefined marriage.

"Family Research Council strongly supported the Defense of Marriage Act, and disagreed with the Court's decision in Windsor. However, if the federal government is required to defer to state determinations of which of their residents are 'married,' it must defer to those determinations in all fifty states - not just those that have redefined marriage.

"The State Marriage Defense Act is consistent with the ruling in Windsor, which reiterated that states have the 'historic and essential authority to define the marital relation.' The current Obama administration policy is doing the very thing which the Court condemned - 'creating two contradictory marriage regimes within the same State.'

"The State Marriage Defense Act serves to protect state definitions of marriage against what the Court called efforts 'to put a thumb on the scales and influence a state's decision as to how to shape its own marriage laws,'" concluded Perkins.

U.S. Rep. Randy Weber (R-Texas) will join Family Research Council President Tony Perkins today on his daily radio show, Washington Watch, at 5:20 p.m. Eastern. Listen online at tonyperkins.com.

-30-

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