en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/634528 Comments by doubtful http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9A4OR6O0#IDComment31064239 When the concerns of homosexuals was "privacy" I was sympathetic. But marriage most certainly is not supposed to be a purely private matter. It requires government sanction by means of a license and government approval of its dissolution by means of a divorce decree. But invasion of privacy by means of government always requires some rational basis. By the approach it is taking it its defense of DOMA it is obvious to me that DOJ intends to loose it case thereby getting DOMA overturned. Tue, 18 Aug 2009 02:32:40 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9A4OR6O0#IDComment31064239 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9A4OR6O0#IDComment31062940 Actually the DOJ is not acting as it should, for what it is actually doing is deliberately and deceitfully undermining the rational basis for the Constitutionality of the law that it claims it is trying to defend : "..... The administration also disavowed past arguments made by conservatives that DOMA protects children by defining marriage as between a man and a woman. .... The United States does not believe that DOMA is rationally related to any legitimate government interests in procreation and child-rearing and is therefore not relying upon any such interests to defend DOMA's constitutionality," lawyers argued in the filing. " If defining marriage as between a man and a woman does not rationally relate to any legitimate government interest in procreation and child-bearing, then what would constitute such a legitimate government interest? Why should government care whether or not homosexuals get married? Why should I? It is simply not a matter of civil concern!! Tue, 18 Aug 2009 02:11:55 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9A4OR6O0#IDComment31062940 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9A4OR6O0#IDComment31056441 gb, I am old, and at this point both my wife and I are infertile. So why should recognition of the fact that ,except for the fact that sexual activity between males and females risks the creation of babies for whom both their parents must accept and share lifelong responsibilities, what would justify any civil involvement whatsoever in the sexual activities of anybody? When homosexuals argued for their right to privacy I was sympathetic with them. But marriage, for reasons stated above is certainly not a private matter. That is why it supposed to require a license to start it and a divorce to stop it. Tue, 18 Aug 2009 00:17:13 +0000 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9A4OR6O0#IDComment31056441