Senator Coons joins colleagues in introducing repeal of Defense of Marriage Act
Mar 17th, 2011 by Tennessee Walker
Press Release
Senator Chris Coons Cosponsors “Respect for Marriage Act” to give federal protections to same-sex couples
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) today reiterated his call for a repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, cosponsoring a bill introduced today by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and 17 other Democratic Senators. The Respect for Marriage Act would repeal the provision in the Defense of Marriage Act that forces the federal government to recognize only marriages between a man and a woman and instruct that the federal government shall no longer discriminate against same-sex couples.
“There are thousands of same-sex couples legally married in several states but whose marriages have been deemed invalid or unworthy by the federal government,” Senator Coons said. “The Respect for Marriage Act not only reverses this discriminatory provision but ensures LGBT families will be afforded the same federal rights as every other American. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill.”
The Respect for Marriage Act does not legalize same-sex marriage beyond the states in which it is already legal. It respects the right of states to set their own marriage laws but ends federal discrimination against those same-sex couples legally married in those states in which it is permitted.
“There are too many young people growing up in Delaware and throughout the United States who think the world is against them because they are gay,” Senator Coons said. “Repealing DOMA is one way we can tell a whole generation of young Americans that they should not give up and that their country respects them enough to treat them as equal to every other American.”
“In the Declaration of Independence,” Senator Coons added, “our founders set down the principle that governments are established to protect our rights and liberties, foremost our equality under law. The Respect for Marriage Act does just that. It ensures that our government equally safeguards the rights of all Americans and of all the states.”
The Respect for Marriage act is also cosponsored by Senators Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), John Kerry (D-Mass.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Dan Inouye (D-Hawaii), and Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii).
Senator Coons, a longtime advocate for equal rights for the LGBT community, will be the keynote speaker at the Human Rights Campaign Philadelphia Region annual dinner on Friday, March 19.
Thank you very much 9/12 Delaware patriots!
“Thank you very much 9/12 Delaware patriots!”
Interesting point as Castle voted for the original DOMA. However the 9-12 patriots were not alone.
The Respect for Marriage Act not only reverses this discriminatory provision but ensures LGBT families will be afforded the same federal rights as every other American.
I’ve always wondered about the inclusion of the B and the T on that. Do the supposed “bisexuals” have more rights than everyone else because they can have the “gay rights” and the “straight rights”? Then there’s the transexuals, who are hated by many gays and lesbians. It’s interesting that they say they can choose their biological sex while gays say that they cannot choose their desires due to biology. And all of this is in the same tolerant group? And bisexuals are often hated by lesbians too. It’s not one big happy family, although many put on a good show. It’s too bad about the children but that’s the way that “heterosexuals” who agree with a philosophy of hedonism are too. It’s the philosophy that’s important.
In any event, everyone already has the same “federal rights” regardless of their sexual desires because rights aren’t based on sexual desires.
Two men can’t get ‘married.’
“My wife, John, is pregnant.”
Do you, Steve, take this person, Mark, as your lawfully wedded wife?”
“Now, Harold and Elmer, go forth and multiply…”
“Mrs. Johnson, how do you spell your first name?”
“S-E-A-N”
You can’t make the absurd real, normal or true just because you want to. Words have meanings.
“Guess who’s getting married? Mike and Murray.”
Words have meanings.
Not in the absence of civilization…. what’s interesting about America is that some of the Right is joining the Left in severing that link. I think someone once summarize it as radical individualism being combined with radical egalitarianism. An unhappy marriage to be sure….
philosophical constructs can’t get married!