the position is -- and this is where you are 100% wrong about the entire issue -- if the US government is going to pass a law specifically defining a right for one group but not others, it must do so with an extremely valid reason, otherwise it is nothing more than discrimination. if you want to reduce it to what you stated here that is your right (or privilege as the case may be). it still does not change the fact that DOMA was legislated discrimination, which *IS* against the Constitution, and specifically the 14th amendment which says that the government cannot create laws which deny "equal protection under the law". it is a constitutional issue because the government created DOMA specifically to deny a certain subset of the population the same benefits as the majority. for you to argue otherwise means you cannot grasp the importance of what it means if the government is allowed to pass laws that provide for legal discrimination based on a defined criteria.



and even though you said all this stuff, you are still 100% wrong, both legally *and* morally. you have offered nothing more than fallacies and emotional responses to what is a strict legal matter. i would urge you to take a step back, rethink what you have said, and come back when you can argue the *legal* merits of the case.