Marriage is a legal contract, therefore, the Federal Government has the right to define marriage as one woman and one man. Domestic partners should be recognized by the federal government and given a tax break as such. Should homosexual people be allowed to wed, then why not allow polygamist to marry?
the federal government has reason to define marriage for federal purposes, such as spousal privilege in a federal court, tax purposes, or social security. Other than these federal purposes, the federal government has no reason to define marriage.
In most cases, the federal definition could follow the legality of marriage from the individual states.
The sacrament of marriage was defined by the Lord and no other institution has the authority to pervert it. People who choose an abhorrent sexual lifestyle can have an institution that recognizes their union legally as a civil union. Many supporters of gay marriage cry "haters" and "bigotry " to those who disagree,but they refer to a tiny minority who are truly this way. Now they are forcing their beliefs on a silent and dissenting majority. Affirmative Action was and is true bigotry and gay "marriage" is the Godless left's effort to undermine societies moral compass.
If the federal government was able to accurately define marriage, there would be no issues. Before 1967, miscegenation statutes, laws forbidding interracial marriage, existed in 16 states. The case of Loving v. Virginia in 1967, in which the Supreme Court struck down a Virginia anti-miscegenation law, paved the way for interracial couples to legally marry in America. There was DOMA in 1996. This year the Supreme Court.... When is it going to end? What about common law marriage, polygamy, and incestous marriage to name a few? These married people have rights too! Leave tax benefits and marriage definition to the states and the money hungry couples who supposedly love each other.
The Government does not grant me or you any rights or choices here in America because our Government is designed for the people and by the people to protect our choices and freedom.
In example the 2nd amendment solidifies the truth that all Americans have the God given right to own and carry a firearm. The Government never granted us permission to do this it only made it law to recognize the citizens right to bear arms.
It's the same with gay marriage where the gay movement is seeking the approval of the Federal Government, for a societal issue, to enforce and make illegal any disagreement with their subjective views. Even going so far as to threaten and sue psychiatric agencies into submission of their beliefs and lifestyle. That is the same as 2nd amendment supporters threatening the psychiatric agencies with guns and legal actions to get their way.
Marriage is a tradition of union between two people, often (but not always) involving religion or other views. The government has no business interfering with the decision to love and commit yourself to another person.
The government is, however, in the business of enforcing laws, and thus dealing with contracts. If someone decides they want to have a legal contract in relation to their marriage, the government can provide oversight there, but no more than that.
The government can only be involved in marriage because it is a legal contract involving all sorts of things that mostly have to do with financial interests of the parties. So, if the government wants to define marriage they have only to discuss the legally binding stuff about marriage. When the government tries to define what marriage is, it is stepping outside of its authority and venturing into the area of religion. Marriage is the only legally binding contract that tries to assert the relative sexes of the parties involved. The government should have to present a relevant argument as to why it is the only exception, one that does not involve a religious consideration, because in this country we are supposed to have a separation between church and state.
I believe the federal government does not have the right to define marriage. It is an obligation for the couple at hand to decide how they will spend the rest of their lives. The government should have no say in how people view one another. If the federal government had a say, it would be against a citizens free will.