- The Washington Times - Thursday, May 2, 2013


Someone ought to point out to Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in no way restricts an individual state’s laws concerning who in that state may marry, nor does it restrict laws having to do with receipt of state benefits attendant to persons married in that state (“Supreme Court questions DOMA’s legitimacy,” Web, March 28).

As the Supreme Court considers whether DOMA is constitutional, the real question is actually whether Congress can enact laws that are discriminatory to a certain group or class of people. Most of the benefits provided by the federal government for spouses ensured the lifetime economic well-being of the bedrock of the family, the stay-at-home mother. Since the traditional family unit is no longer in vogue (and just look at the negative results of that change), maybe it is time for Congress to revisit the issue of who gets those discriminatory benefits.

However, the Supreme Court’s task is simply to decide the constitutionality of those federal laws that are discriminatory for a certain group or class of people, regardless of how those laws promote the general welfare of the United States.


Hedgesville, W.Va.

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide