When the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) passed in Congress in 1996, the vote was bi-partisan and overwhelming. In the House, the tally was 342-67. Only the farthest left of Democrats and a handful of Republicans voted against it. A majority of Democrats supported marriage. In the Senate, the vote was even more lopsided and bi-partisan, 85-14. Again, most Democrats backed marriage. In both houses of Congress, the DOMA passed with such strong margins that President Clinton could clearly see the measure had better than "veto strength." That is, if he had vetoed the Defense of Marriage Act, Congress could have...
Because many same sex marriages do provide stability and not all traditional marriages provide stability in any sense of the word. So in essence, this reward is not based on the behavior you claim it is meant for. Furthermore, marriage is about the joining of two lives through a sacred or ultimate pledge. It is not about propagation. Though an important part of life, the lack of children does not invalidate or devalue a traditional marriage. Finally if it is an all important goal of society to employ best method for raising the next generation of citizens, then it would enforce standards to that end and take steps against those who don’t provide such a setting. Are you calling for the government to come in and take away the child?
- David Cameron to Scotland: Baby, don’t go. Mary Katharine Ham 20 mins ago
- Confirmed: You can tell someone’s politics by their body odor Allahpundit 1 hour ago
- Oh my: I think Romney’s going to run, says top Wall Street backer Allahpundit 1 hour ago
- Election forecasters bearish on GOP? Senate models looking more Democratic by the day Noah Rothman 2 hours ago
- Dempsey continues to frustrate Obama with admission some Arab allies fund ISIS Noah Rothman 3 hours ago
- Coercive fines, national security, and the Death Star Ed Morrissey 4 hours ago