Challenging Doma, Changing the Federal Definition

Nanti-SARRMM · Post by **Nanti-SARRMM** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:00 am

I didn't want to resurrect an old topic, so I thought I'd make a new topic.

It appears that Doma is being challenged about not treating same gendered couples the same under federal law as state law.

This is definitely interesting.

bismark · Post by **bismark** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:27 am

[T]he Church does not object to rights for same-sex couples regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the traditional family or the constitutional rights of churches.

so does that make this a good thing?

Katya · Post by **Katya** » Fri Mar 06, 2009 8:01 am

bismark wrote:
[T]he Church does not object to rights for same-sex couples regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the traditional family or the constitutional rights of churches.
so does that make this a good thing?

What does "this" refer to? (The Church's policy or the court challenge?)

Nanti-SARRMM · Post by **Nanti-SARRMM** » Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:42 pm

Also the Iowa legislature is putting forth a bill to make civil unions civil marriages.

bismark · Post by **bismark** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 8:02 pm

Katya wrote:What does "this" refer to? (The Church's policy or the court challenge?)

the court challenge. it seems like the DOMA is keeping the federal government from extending rights to same sex couples in legal civil unions. no doubt some people will want to push for federally sanction marriages, but giving same sex couples certain rights at a federal level seems in line with the church's position.

wired · Post by **wired** » Mon May 11, 2009 3:57 pm

bismark wrote:
Katya wrote:What does "this" refer to? (The Church's policy or the court challenge?)
the court challenge. it seems like the DOMA is keeping the federal government from extending rights to same sex couples in legal civil unions. no doubt some people will want to push for federally sanction marriages, but giving same sex couples certain rights at a federal level seems in line with the church's position.

I'm interested in the assertion that DOMA is preventing the federal government from creating civil unions. As I understood it, it pertains solely to marriage. I haven't studied the topic intensely, so I could just be misinformed. Do you have any sources on that I which I could read?

As I see it, the Church would very much want DOMA to continue as law. I personally like DOMA, but I definitely think it is in violation of the Full Faith and Credit Clause and Congress' constitutional powers. If I were a judge, I would feel obligated to invalidate at least the out-of-state recognition part of DOMA.