The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments Wednesday for a case challenging the constitutionality of the part of the Defense of Marriage Act that defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman for federal laws.In the case, United States vs. Windsor, Edith Windsor sued the federal government, claiming that DOMA violated her constitutional guarantee to equal protection under the law. Windsor married her same-sex partner, Thea Spyer, in Canada. When Spyer passed away, she left her estate to Windsor, who then had to pay $363,000 in federal estate taxes. She would not have had to pay those taxes if the federal government recognized her marriage.read more: http://www.christianpost.com/news/supreme-court-hearing-challenge-to-defense-of-marriage-act-92710/
_________________SI Moderator - Greg Gordon
This is a shame. It seems that the sanctity of marriage is not even the question in this case, but rather one of money. The love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, and it seems expedioent to the evil to undo the marriage covenant as set forth by God simply so make it possible to avoid taxes.Have mercy on us God, we are such a sinful people and we have dealt treacherously with Your covenant!
Forgive me, please, for my lack off faith. But I truly expect DOMA to be ruled unconstutional. And sane sex marriages to be recognized. Though on tbis I would hope God prove me wrong.It may be, believers, will have to go underground to have Christ centered marriages.Bearmaster.
i too feel this way as Bearmaster.When you break it down in legal terms, it is readily apparent that the traditional marriage side has a weaker argument. The central legal question is whether the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment prohibits states and the federal govt. from denying a right to a class of persons. That right is marriage and the class of persons are the estimated 120,000 married same-sex couples. The same sex marriage folks argue that they have suffered harm because of DOMA. The lead plaintiff, Edith Windsor, has argued that she was denied spousal death benefits when her marriage partner passed away. Clearly this is an issue of equal protection. I think this will trigger strict scrutiny, which requires the govt. to argue that the state has a compelling interest beyond a simple reasonable doubt to deny marriage to same sex couples. This is the highest form of scrutiny and the most difficult for the govt. to argue and prove. Clearly traditional marriage does not have a strong legal argument here. Add to the fact that polls show that same sex marriage is becoming more accepting in our society and thus we are looking at a dangerous future for marriage. God help us. Its also a losing situation on the issue of standing. The court stressed all sides, especially traditional side to argue why it should have standing to sue. For those that are not aware, on the Prop 8 case the attorney general of CA declined to defend the law saying she believed it was unconstitutional. On the DOMA case, the Justice Dept. has also declined to defend the law citing as well its belief that it is unconstitutional. Thus we are left with folks other than the govt. to defend both laws. And thus we come to the issue of standing. On the prop 8 case, the court scrutinized the traditional marriage side because it believed that it was doubtful that they had suffered serious harm. Same thing for DOMA. House Republicans are defending the law and the court expressed doubts that they had suffered harm. In law, one has to show that they have suffered serious harm and thus if they show this the lawsuit can proceed. If the court chooses to dismiss the cases on the basis of lack of standing, then lower court rulings would stand and thus both laws would be unconstitutional. God help us all! No matter what happens, let us still proclaim the benefits of traditional Marriage!
There are forces of darkness at work here. It's a sad thing.Ceasar may say it's ok in his kingdom, but I'm afraid it won't fly in God's.Ceasar doesn't seem to care too much about his kingdom
_________________James R Barnes