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?
- Quotes of the day Allahpundit 3 hours ago
- Citizen legislator Sen. Mary Landrieu doesn’t really live in Louisiana Mary Katharine Ham 4 hours ago
- Democrats go after Republican for self-defense measure he took…14 years ago Matt Vespa 4 hours ago
- Rubio: If I had to vote again on my Gang of Eight immigration bill, I’d vote no Allahpundit 5 hours ago
- Obama lets another red line lapse in Ukraine, and the consequences will be dire Noah Rothman 6 hours ago
- Heartache for lefties: Elizabeth Warren defends Israel at Massachusetts town hall Allahpundit 6 hours ago