Does the Defense of Marriage Act constitute federal overreach?

  • Yes the act constitutes federal overreach, I believe that the federal government should stay out of acts of marriage.

    Yes, I believe that the Defense of Marriage Act constitutes federal overreach and when tries to determine who can and cannot get married. I believe that the federal government should stay out of acts of marriage, and that trying to pass an act that defines marriage so narrowly overreaches the powers of the federal government.

  • Yes, this is not an affair the Federal government should be involved in.

    The federal government has a nasty habit of sticking its nose into places it doesn't belong. In this case, marriage doesn't need to be determined by lawmakers. Whether or not two people want to enter into a contract of love and compassion for one another is up to them, as it does not affect the people around them. This is NOT a government issue.

  • States' rights aren't just for delusional rednecks.

    The Defense of Marriage Act constitutes overreach in two serious ways. First, it encroaches on a legally protected area that the states of the U.S. should be in charge of. Second, and more importantly it represents an overreach into an area of people's lives that is not only inherently private, but protected by both the First Amendment and the Equal Protection clause.

  • Yes, this is not the business of government.

    The government should not at all be involved in defining marriage. Marriage is a personal contract between people, and the only reason government needs to be involved is because it has been involved in property disputes between people who are dissolving their marriage contract. The idea that the government can define marriage itself, as if the very agreement of people to marry is subject to its oversight and approval is ludicrous and an infringement on the right of the people.

  • No responses have been submitted.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.