1 post tagged “gay marriage”

View other items tagged “gay marriage:” Photos, Audio, Videos, Books or Links. View “gay marriage” on Vox.

It's okay, if it'll save the government money, I don't really need equal rights.

Jun 14, 2009
2 comments

Reading up on the DOMA decision:

DOMA ensures that evolving understandings of the institution of marriage at the State level do not place greater financial and administrative obligations on federal and state benefits programs. Preserving scarce government resources — and deciding to extend benefits incrementally — are well-recognized legitimate interests under rational-basis review.

So what, we can only afford to spend MY tax dollars to support hetero marriages? It's okay to discriminate if we save money?!

Oh, and also, it's okay because no one is imposing this lack of right as a means to gain supremacy for one specific group:

Loving v. Virginia [interracial marriage] is not to the contrary. There the Supreme Court rejected a contention that the assertedly "equal application" of a statute prohibiting interracial marriage immunized the statute from strict scrutiny. 388 U.S. 1, 8, 87 S.Ct. 1817, 18 L.Ed.2d 1010 (1967). The Court had little difficulty concluding that the statute, which applied only to "interracial marriages involving white persons," was "designed to maintain White Supremacy" and therefore unconstitutional. Id. at 11. No comparable purpose is present here, however, for DOMA does not seek in any way to advance the "supremacy" of men over women, or of women over men. Thus DOMA cannot be "traced to a . . . purpose" to discriminate against either men or women. Personnel Adm'r v. Feeney, 442 U.S. 256, 272, 99 S. Ct. 2282, 60 L.Ed.2d 870 (1979). In upholding the traditional definition of marriage, numerous courts have expressly rejected an alleged analogy to Loving.

Oh, but it's all okay, because it's not because they don't like me. Really, guys - it's nothing personal:

Under our federalist system, preserving the autonomy of state and federal governments to address evolving definitions of an age-old societal institution is itself a legitimate governmental interest. Moreover, because DOMA protected "the ability of elected officials to decide matters related to homosexuality," including their right to recognize same-sex marriage, it plainly was not born solely as a result of animosity towards homosexuals.