Bob Barr repents of DOMA

He says his own bill doesn’t work! Maybe he’ll even become a Libertarian someday. The LA Times is a tad more cynical about this. But whether Barr likes gays is totally immaterial to the question of equal treatment under the law. Nat that Barr is for that, quite; he still thinks it’s OK for states to mess with marriage:

In effect, DOMA’s language reflects one-way federalism: It protects only those states that don’t want to accept a same-sex marriage granted by another state. Moreover, the heterosexual definition of marriage for purposes of federal laws — including, immigration, Social Security survivor rights and veteran’s benefits — has become a de facto club used to limit, if not thwart, the ability of a state to choose to recognize same-sex unions.

Even more so now than in 1996, I believe we need to reduce federal power over the lives of the citizenry and over the prerogatives of the states. It truly is time to get the federal government out of the marriage business. In law and policy, such decisions should be left to the people themselves.


2 Responses to Bob Barr repents of DOMA

  1. vladseventysix says:

    Will somebody please explain how a man and a woman can be married as heterosexual relations if gender, mating, and baby, all have absolutely nothing to do with the Institution of Marriage. So, am I to conclude a man and a woman can be married as non-heterosexual relations? So, am I to conclude equality like beauty is in the eye of the beholder? And if same sex marriage advocates are wrong then what are the consequences and why should those consequences be re-evaluated? So, am I to conclude the claim of infallibility for same sex marriage is based on personal faith? Nobody, but, nobody has the right to be liked. Nobody, but, nobody has that Royal Prerogitive. The case against same sex marriage can be made with out calling anybody any names. There’s an old saying, “Winston! We do it for the power”! Air tight!

  2. jeffreyquick says:

    Shrug. I believe that the state can’t marry gays for the same reason it can’t marry straights: it’s not part of a valid apostolic succession and is thus not qualified to administer the Sacraments. That said, I see no reason why the State shouldn’t hand out preformed legal partnerships (so called “marriage) like popcorn.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: