Difference between revisions of "Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Homosexuality"
From Conservapedia
(DOMA) |
(→Example Nine) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:[[DOMA]] has two parts, the first as you say but the second establishing that the federal government recognizes only traditional marriage.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:20, 9 February 2012 (EST) | :[[DOMA]] has two parts, the first as you say but the second establishing that the federal government recognizes only traditional marriage.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:20, 9 February 2012 (EST) | ||
| + | :: Fair enough. That makes sense. [[User:Gregkochuconn|Gregkochuconn]] 15:37, 15 February 2012 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 20:37, February 15, 2012
Example Nine
Didn't DOMA give states the right to recognize same-sex marriages if they so choose? So the fact that only marriage between a man and a woman is recognized federally is irrelevant. DOMA gives California the right to either recognize or not recognize same-sex marriage. For that matter, I'm not even sure DOMA recognizes marriage between a man and a woman federally (not that any state is preventing it). I'm pretty sure it leaves control to the states. Gregkochuconn 23:06, 9 February 2012 (EST)
- DOMA has two parts, the first as you say but the second establishing that the federal government recognizes only traditional marriage.--Andy Schlafly 23:20, 9 February 2012 (EST)
- Fair enough. That makes sense. Gregkochuconn 15:37, 15 February 2012 (EST)
