Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement that the department will stop defending DOMA because of a Second Circuit challenge, "which has no established or binding standard for how laws concerning sexual orientation should be treated (...) After careful consideration, including a review of my recommendation, the President has concluded that given a number of factors, including a documented history of discrimination, classifications based on sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened standard of scrutiny. The President has also concluded that Section 3 of DOMA (...) fails to meet that standard and is therefore unconstitutional."
Section 3. Definition of marriage
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.
DOMA was signed into law by president Clinton in 1996.
"I think in so many ways it was a different time and people were a little more afraid and hadn't thought about it much," said King County Councilmember Joe McDermott, who lives with his same-sex partner in West Seattle and is an outspoken gay rights advocate. He was referring to America's frame of mind of same-sex marriage and rights in 1996.
"Even today there isn't universal acceptance of gay marriage, of marriage equality," he said. "There was far less then. Conservatives in congress were taking an early step in being reactionary. I think Americans will one day look back and won't understand what all the concern was. I think it's important the administration not promote discriminatory policy.
"I am aware of where many people in the country are, wanting (the gay community) to have equal protections but somewhat uncertain whether that should be called 'marriage'. That's an argument I am willing to participate in. I am willing to let it go for now and let them get used to the idea but would like them to hurry up."
McDermott said that Section 3 will work its way through the appeals court and end up in the Supreme Court. "Then a (gay) couple married in, say Massachusetts, gets federal benefits and can file a tax return as if they are married," he said. "If one partner dies the survivor gets survivor benefits on Social Security. That's a start."
McDermott would like Section 2 to be challenged, too. Then the federal government would recognize the marriage of a gay couple in Massachusetts in all other states.
The president's new stance hits close to home for some, including West Seattle residents Elise Lindborg and Kelli Henderson. Many here know them through their promotional product business, ZippyDogs, south of the Junction. Because Washington State has no same-sex marriage, Lindborg and Henderson, who celebrate their 20-year anniversary March 23, have just a "domestic partnership card" like McDermott and his partner. And they have each other.
"I think it's fantastic, trying to do away with Section 3," enthused Henderson. "We're not 'radical gay rights folks' but at times we do get mad because we've been together longer than a lot of married couples and still have to fight for what everyone takes for granted.
"When I see some of the ugliness on the news that people are spouting off, the stuff that comes out of their mouth, I don't know where they're coming from," she added. "It's like they're coming from another planet."
" I grew up in the church and was taught to love everyone." said Lindborg. "Certain factions get all worked up. I would love them to spend their energy on something more effective, like feeding the poor. If they were to live a week with Kelli and me they'd realize we're just about as boring as any married couple. We don't flaunt it. We are block watch captains. We're good neighbors, and they love and respect us."
No comments:
Post a Comment