The ‘Defense of Marriage Act’ and Authoritarian Morality
The William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal, Vol. 5, pp. 619-642, Summer 1997
20 Pages Posted: 11 Aug 2010
Date Written: June 3, 1997
Abstract
The “Defense of Marriage Act” has defined marriage at the federal level for the purpose of denying recognition to same-sex marriages. It thereby perpetuates the unequal treatment of homosexuals, and does so by denying them a fundamental right – the right to marry. In this Essay, I examines the wide range of justifications offered in Congress for this law. Six categories of argument are assessed: (1) politics and economics, (2) history and tradition, (3) religion, (4) the essential nature of marriage and the family, (5) social decay, and (6) morality. I conclude that none of the justifications prove to be adequate to deny homosexuals equal access to the institution of marriage. In addition, I argue that they point to a moral rigidity that distorts one’s perception of what it means to be a homosexual. I conclude that this rigidity or authoritarianism produces a form of intolerance incompatible with our professed commitment to political equality and to protecting basic rights and liberties.
Keywords: marriage, same-sex marriage, the defense of marriage act, equality, fundamental rights, intolerance
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation