Sabina Exy
Palm Beach State College
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to inform the reader of the Defense of Marriage Act set in 1996. It explains why Congress felt the need to pass this act into law. this act was passed and the problems that came along with it. You are writing this paper to analyze the Defense of Marriage Act, to determine the public need, to analyze the solution, to determine what challenges your Act faced and to analyze the effectiveness of the policy. Keywords: Defense of marriage act, DOMA, same sex marriage,
DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT
Public Need
There has always been a problem with separating church from state. And even though Congressmen should separate …show more content…
The purpose of this act was to define and protect the institution of marriage. It was brought to Congress by House of Representative member Bob Barr. It was passed by both the Senate and the House of Representatives. This act has three sections. The first section is to tell us that the act may be referred to as the Defense of Marriage Act. The second section is to tell us that none of the states are required to recognize and treat same-sex marriages the same to heterosexual marriages. The reason why the second section needed to be established is because of the Full Faith and Credit Clause, all states and territories of America must honor other state’s laws and decision. Lastly, the third section defines what marriage is federally, which is a legal union between a man and a woman (Defense of Marriage Act). Meaning, for homosexual couples, even if legally married, benefits of heterosexual couples such as social security, filing of joint taxes, and insurance would not be accessible to …show more content…
During the time he signed the bill he needed to think about being reelected, so he signed the bill more out of politics than his own actual principles (Baker, 2013). The problems with this act is that section two of DOMA clashes with the Full Faith and Credit Clause, it does not allow same sex marriages the same benefits of heterosexual marriages, it sets a standard of one marriage being more important over another, and it really denies rights of a particular group of people who live in the same country, working the same jobs, and paying the same taxes as everyone else. In Section three of DOMA, marriage is defined as a being between a man and a woman (DOMA), so the gay couples that are legally married are not able to receive the same benefits as legal married couples. Very recently, in 2013, in the case of United States v Windsor, the Supreme Court found section three of DOMA to be considered unconstitutional (United States v Windsor, 2013).
References
Baker, P. (2013, March 25). Now in Defense of Gay Marriage, Bill Clinton. The New York Times.
Clinton, B. (2013, March 7). Bill Clinton: It’s time to overturn DOMA. The Washington Post.
Herman, D. (1994). Rights of Passage: Struggles for Lesbian and Gay Legal Equality. Toronto: University of Toronto Press Incorporated.
SCHWARTZ, J. (2010, November 8). Gay Couples to Sue