DOMA: I’m Catching Hell…

13 Mar

Good Morning!

Friends, this will be brief.

I’m catching a lot of hell for recent remarks I made regarding repealing DOMA on a social media thread. As many of you already know, DOMA  (Defense of Marriage Act) is a United States federal law that defines marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman for federal and inter-state recognition purposes in the United States. The law passed both houses of Congress by large majorities and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996. Under the law, no U.S. state or political subdivision is required to recognize a same-sex marriage from another state. Section 3 of DOMA codifies the non-recognition of same-sex marriages for all federal purposes, including insurance benefits for government employees, Social Security survivors’ benefits, immigration, and the filing of joint tax returns. In my opinion, this is unconstitutional because the Constitution does not give the federal government the authority to define marriage in any way. It is also important to note that former President Bill Clinton has recently appealed for a repeal of DOMA.

Listen, either conservatives are for limited government or they are not. What I am finding out is that some of us, on the right, only want limited government when it suits us. Liberals, on the other hand, seem to want the federal government involved in every aspect of our lives (which is problematic too!), but I digress. We don’t want the federal government to re-define marriage to include same sex unions yet we support that same federal government defining marriage our way. It’s inconsistent, and I try my best not to be. DOMA is unconstitutional and no matter what spin we come up with, the federal government should not be defining marriage. This includes heterosexual or homosexual unions.

I advocate states’ rights but to put an end to the issue I think the state & the feds should get out of marriage altogether. Last year I shared with you all my marriage proposal intended to fairly resolve this issue. I, together with my friend & fellow writer Walter Myers III plan to make some changes to that initial proposal and address other issues that will arise, such as polygamy. The government should issue everyone civil unions (gay & straight couples) and allow religious institutions to define marriage for themselves. Since there are plenty of religious institutions who already perform same sex unions, it is very fair. You can simply choose not to attend such a religious institution if what they choose to allow is against your beliefs. Any other solution will give politicians room to repeal/enact laws every 2, 4 or 6 years – each time congressional demographics change and power shifts to the Democratic party or the GOP. They will continue to use this issue to take our eyes off of the economy and quite frankly, I’m sick of it. We need to end this already and I stand by my commentary. I also welcome the thoughts of persons from all political affiliations, or without one, on this issue. Together, we can resolve this fairly, in a “multi-partisan” manner and move on to other issues.


Consevative blogger Talitha McEachin

 Talitha “TK” McEachin

Talitha “TK” McEachin is a conservative libertarian political & cultural blogger for CainTV, and Yahoo Voices. She’s also an editorial writer for Black Literature Magazine & an upcoming writer of fiction. Her first novel, THE ELEMENTS, the first book in her epic fantasy series will be released in 2013. Learn more about her fictional writing by visiting her website (


Posted by on March 13, 2013 in In The News, Politics, Society


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

5 responses to “DOMA: I’m Catching Hell…

  1. Ryan Brooks

    March 13, 2013 at 9:33 am

    I’ll be honest with you, I don’t believe that the kind of marriage the state (or federal) government defines is the most important one. I agree that a marriage should, ideally be a union to the exclusion of all others, including the government. But it makes sense that the government is so heavily invested, because there are and always will be a lot of laws surrounding civil union, such as inheritance, guardianship and power of attorney. And as to where it’d ‘constitutional’ to amend the laws surrounding marriage, doesn’t that make bills and amendments as a whole ‘unconstitutional’? Let’s face it, the U.S. constitution has been amended many, many times in the last few hundred years, and deservedly so. It’s not holy doctrine. It’s a set of laws made to form the basis of a nation. It doesn’t stop being the structure’s foundation just because you add a 2nd storey.

    • teemtwo

      March 13, 2013 at 10:00 am

      Thanks for your comment Ryan. You’re right about the constitution. The government’s interest in marriage is only to generate revenue through licenses & divorce…etc In my proposal that won’t change because what used to be a marriage license will simply change to a civil union license. Divorces will still be handled by the government too but of course religious institutions can require a divorce procedure too for those who are religious, or they can leave it up to the state. I do agree that a marriage between a man & woman should be a separate union excluding all others because only man & woman can procreate. It is what it is. To resolve the issue though, I’m in favor of letting religious institutions define it.

  2. Ryan Brooks

    March 13, 2013 at 9:34 am

    Er, ‘whether it would be ‘constitutional”

  3. Talon's Point

    March 15, 2013 at 7:31 am

    Reblogged this on Talon's Point and commented:
    I agree with this take on marriage. In my opinion it doesn’t condone homosexual unions. It simply get govt out of religion’s domain, leaving civil unions as a legal contract.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: