Post by foolishwisdom on Nov 10, 2011 13:27:32 GMT -5
Damn 50 character limit. RfMA is Respect for Marriage Act. But yes, in a close 10 to 8 vote, Respect for Marriage Act has been passed. Here's the video of the calling via Think Progress:
And a statement from the White House was released shortly after:
thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/11/10/366339/senate-judiciary-committee-advances-respect-for-marriage-act/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indecently, here are some highlights leading up to the vote.
Here we have Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) stating that DOMA is in place because only straight families are capable of “stable families, good environments for raising children and religious beliefs.” And he doesn't believe that DOMA or limiting marriage to 1 man 1 woman relationship was made with the intention to discriminate, or to make second-class citizens out of anyone.
So...it doesn't sound like he means to discriminate against homosexual couples, nor treat them as second-class citizens, but that's what DOMA does. Of course, when your (religious) beliefs are against homosexuality, I imagine it'd be hard to feel sympathy for them anyway...
Along the same vein, we have Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), who argues that extending federal benefits to homosexual couples would, putting it simply, cost too much.
It's not in the video, but according to Think Progress, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) responded, “We can afford to be a free nation whatever the cost may be.”
And finally, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), pulled the incest-card. Apparently, if homosexual couples are allowed to be married and gain benefits, then two brothers or two sisters have the right to be married and get the same benefits.
How would this be any different from brother & sister marrying? it is still "1 man, 1 woman".
thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/11/10/366215/republicans-speak-out-against-respect-for-marriage-act-only-opposite-couples-can-form-stable-families-marriage-equality-is-too-expensive/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, Sen. Al Franken (D-MN), gives a finger wagging, so to speak, to the people who support DOMA, specifically Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), and their claims that marriage has always been 1 man, 1 woman, and other lies and crap about marriage, and gives a brief history lesson about what marriage was really about.
thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/11/10/366309/al-franken-fact-checks-chuck-grassley-marriage-has-evolved-over-time/
And a statement from the White House was released shortly after:
President Obama applauds today’s vote by the Senate Judiciary Committee to approve the Respect for Marriage Act, which would provide a legislative repeal of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act.
The President has long believed that DOMA is discriminatory and has called for its repeal. We should all work towards taking this law off the books. The federal government should not deny gay and lesbian couples the same rights and legal protections afforded to straight couples.
The President has long believed that DOMA is discriminatory and has called for its repeal. We should all work towards taking this law off the books. The federal government should not deny gay and lesbian couples the same rights and legal protections afforded to straight couples.
thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/11/10/366339/senate-judiciary-committee-advances-respect-for-marriage-act/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indecently, here are some highlights leading up to the vote.
Here we have Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) stating that DOMA is in place because only straight families are capable of “stable families, good environments for raising children and religious beliefs.” And he doesn't believe that DOMA or limiting marriage to 1 man 1 woman relationship was made with the intention to discriminate, or to make second-class citizens out of anyone.
So...it doesn't sound like he means to discriminate against homosexual couples, nor treat them as second-class citizens, but that's what DOMA does. Of course, when your (religious) beliefs are against homosexuality, I imagine it'd be hard to feel sympathy for them anyway...
Along the same vein, we have Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), who argues that extending federal benefits to homosexual couples would, putting it simply, cost too much.
It's not in the video, but according to Think Progress, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) responded, “We can afford to be a free nation whatever the cost may be.”
And finally, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), pulled the incest-card. Apparently, if homosexual couples are allowed to be married and gain benefits, then two brothers or two sisters have the right to be married and get the same benefits.
How would this be any different from brother & sister marrying? it is still "1 man, 1 woman".
thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/11/10/366215/republicans-speak-out-against-respect-for-marriage-act-only-opposite-couples-can-form-stable-families-marriage-equality-is-too-expensive/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, Sen. Al Franken (D-MN), gives a finger wagging, so to speak, to the people who support DOMA, specifically Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), and their claims that marriage has always been 1 man, 1 woman, and other lies and crap about marriage, and gives a brief history lesson about what marriage was really about.
thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/11/10/366309/al-franken-fact-checks-chuck-grassley-marriage-has-evolved-over-time/
