I'm saying that the Federal government cannot Constitutionally enact laws regarding matters where it has no Constitutional power to act. Defining marriage is not a power granted to the Federal government by the Constitution. That power is reserved to the States.
The Federal govenment has no business making any laws that care one way or the other about a person's marital status. That's not properly a Federal issue, concern or responsibility!
The government not only can, but must decide the requirements necessary to receive Medicare benefits. It must also define the terms used in the laws. Whenever “marriage” appears in fed law, it refers to man/woman.
From DOMA: “In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.”
It is preposterous to let judges define the terms used in federal law. It violates the very separation of powers defined in our Constitution to acquiesce.
One of the founding planks of the GOP was the opposition of the admission of Utah as a territory as long as it practiced polygamy. The Federal gov’t forced Utah to ban polygamy before being allowed in a state. The Federal gov’t did not force Mass to drop gay marriage but stated that in terms of federal benefits and tax code gay marriages would not be recognized.
BTW, DOMA had no effect on homo marriage in MA. Fags can still marry.
The Federal govenment has no business making any laws that care one way or the other about a person's marital status. That's not properly a Federal issue, concern or responsibility!
Bullhockey. Idaho, Arizona, Oklahoma and Utah were only allowed into the Union if they would forever swear off plural marriage. In other words, make a permanent commitment to one man, one woman, MARRIAGE. In their constitutions. Congress had no problem exercising their constitutionally-appointed powers in this area when America was still sane.
Are you pro-polygamy?
By the way, when your Paulite position is mentioned in "mixed company," ie in venues where radical gay activists are present, they literally stand up and cheer at exactly what you are saying.
They know that under your understanding of things, they have won. They have destroyed the institution of marriage. They have successfully destroyed the natural family. They have forced America to accept their perversion in "law."