Posted by
Playful Walrus on Monday, January 05, 2009 3:35:20 PM
Former Republican Congressman Bob Barr, who failed to gain much of a vote as the Libertarian Party's 2008 candidate for POTUS despite McCain being the Republican nominee, has a commentary in today's Los Angeles Times calling for the repeal of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (which he wrote, and President Clinton signed into law).
The left now decries DOMA as the barrier to federal recognition and benefits for married gay couples.
There's nothing about DOMA that prevents the federal government from recognizing same-sex couples, and or applying that to taxation or immigration or other areas. Congress can pass a law that does just that.
I've wrestled with this issue for the last several years and come to the conclusion that DOMA is not working out as planned.
So it should be repealed? I think we should repeal hundreds of other laws that aren't working out as planned, first. Let's have priorities. I don't see anything good being gained from repealing DOMA.
In effect, DOMA's language reflects one-way federalism: It protects only those states that don't want to accept a same-sex marriage granted by another state.
What is the problem there? That was one of goals, wasn't it?
Moreover, the heterosexual definition of marriage for purposes of federal laws -- including, immigration, Social Security survivor rights and veteran's benefits -- has become a de facto club used to limit, if not thwart, the ability of a state to choose to recognize same-sex unions.
How can that be when California subsequently enacted a domestic partnership law that treats domestic partners as spouses?
Even more so now than in 1996, I believe we need to reduce federal power over the lives of the citizenry and over the prerogatives of the states.
So do I. But when you have one state whose judiciary is not following limited-government principles and forcing neutered marriage licensing on the people, why should other states have to accept their error? I’m pretty sure if I get a hunting license for one place, I can't use that hunting license everywhere - even with the full faith and credit clause.
It truly is time to get the federal government out of the marriage business.
It isn't in the marriage business. States are. The federal government recognizes marriages that are licensed by the states.
The paper is taking comments about this one on their website. Click through to add yours to the circus. This one, by "plaasjaapie" at 9:35 AM caught my eye:
"...I believe we need to reduce federal power over the lives of the citizenry and over the prerogatives of the states." I seriously doubt that, Bob. Are you willing to repeal that huge piece of federal legislation that placed serious federal penalties on defaulters on child support payments ordered by state courts that you passed back in 1992? Let me take leave to doubt that very seriously.