Senate Judiciary Committee Hears Testimony For And Against Repeal Of Archaic Defense Of Marriage Act; Republican Representative Steve King Of Iowa Says Repeal Of Act Would “Devalue” Traditional Marriage; Adds Those Who Claim They Cannot Choose Who They Fall In Love With Could Make Same Stance To Defend Polygamy

Proponents of same-sex marriage are likening their cause to the civil rights battles, calling once more for the repeal of a 1996 law that defines marriage as that only existing between a man and a woman, The Associated Press reporting that the new pleas arrived Wednesday at a hearing the Senate Judiciary Committee held on legislation that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. The committee also heard from several supporters of existing law who said repeal would undermine traditional marriage and the will of most Americans. Representative John Lewis (D-Georgia) who led civil rights marches during the 1960s, called the law a stain on democracy. He said that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. answered those who opposed interracial marriages by noting that individuals, not entire races, fall in love and get married. "No government, federal or state, should tell people they cannot marry," Lewis said. But Representative Steve King (R-Iowa) said that repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act would devalue marriage. Those who claim they cannot choose who they fall in love with could make the same argument to justify polygamy, he said. A handful of states and the District of Columbia recognize same-sex marriage. New York will soon join them. But participants in same-sex marriages said they are still discriminated against because they cannot accrue the federal benefits that heterosexual couples receive as a result of marriage. For example, Andrew Sorbo of Connecticut, said that when he retired as a teacher, he had no alternative except to pay for health insurance at a much higher cost that if he could have been covered under his spouse's plan. He said that the federal law exacts a financial toll and an emotional one, and added that "It's an insult to our dignity and our sense of equality." Witnesses speaking in favour of current law noted that many Democratic lawmakers in the hearing room voted for the Defense of Marriage Act 15 years ago. They said those votes helped make the case that the law was designed to protect traditional marriage rather than to discriminate. Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois), citing President Abraham Lincoln in explaining why he now supports repeal, said that he would rather be right some of the time than wrong all of the time. Tom Minnery, senior vice president of the advocacy group Focus on the Family, argued that children fare best when living with their own married mother and father. He said in his written testimony that new family forms has largely served to diminish the well-being of children, women, men and society at large. "I never thought I would have to defend traditional marriage," said Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa. "It's been the foundation of society for 6,000 years." The proponents of repeal acknowledge they have a tough time locating enough votes to make it happen. No Republicans have signed on to legislation sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California) that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.