SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Lane3 who wrote (71876)8/6/2003 4:37:15 PM
From: The Philosopher  Read Replies (1) of 82486
 
Don't know why this isn't enough.

What it fails to do is prevent any state Supreme Court from ruling that their state constitution requires that that state allow same sex couples to marry. That raises many issues.

a. for those states and their programs, the marriage would be legal, even though it wouldn't be for federal programs.

b. What about, for example, state medicare or other programs where the states set the elibigility rules but get lots of federal money?

c. Would the Defense of Marriage act hold up to a constitutional challenge under the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Costitution? That would go to the SC, and who knows how they would rule. A constitutional amendment would supercede FF&C in that area in ways the DOMA might or might not do, nobody knows.

d. It's going to be a real mess out there (here) if, say, four states allow same sex married couples and other states do as Washington has and deny that. Suppose a couple married and living in a "yes" state have a child. The other parent is automatically a parent of the child, and can't adopt under standard marriage laws. Say they then move to a "no" state and try to divorce. What will the "no" state do? They can't divorce them because they don't recognize the marriage. The child won't have been legally adopted by the other party, so will they have to start an adoption proceeding then? It'll be a mess and three quarters.

The Defense of Marriage Act doesn't resolve the problems. Take my word for it. Or don't. Just think it through and you'll see that it becomes a full employment for family law lawyers act.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News