House GOP to hold hearing on ‘defending marriage’

[William769]

A subcommittee in the Republican-controlled U.S. House is set on April 15 to hear testimony in a hearing titled “Defending Marriage.”

The hearing, which is set to take place before the House Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution, is scheduled to begin at 10 am in Room 2141 of the Rayburn House Office Building.

As of Friday, no witness list was posted on the committee website, nor was the intent the hearing immediately known. Whether the likely impending shutdown of the federal government would cancel or postpone the hearing also wasn’t immediately clear.

Charlotte Sellmyer, a House Judiciary Committee spokesperson, said more information would be available next week.

http://www.washingtonblade.com/2011/04/08/house-gop-to-hold-hearing-on-defending-marriage/

[peace13]

1. When do we get to the 'defending jobs? n/t

[UrbScotty]

7. When Democrats get back in control. (Preferably progressives.)

[annabanana]

2. Gee I hope so... my marriage is suffering the shameful devaluation

of allowing someone else to be happy. It's a zero sum game donchaknow. .

[Mz Pip]

3. Well put.

I never quite got the reason why I should feel it necessary for the government to "defend" my marriage. It isn't under attack. There aren't roving bands of Gays pounding at my door with torches and pitchforks threatening me and Mr Pip because we're married.

[annabanana]

5. "roving bands of Gays"

lol

gotta tell you it sounds like a PAR-TAY!

[BillStein]

6. well

not yet, anyway

[queerart]

10. Now, That Was Damn Funny..... n/t

[starroute]

9. You do realize that if the wrong sort of people get married ...

it ruins it for the rest of us?

Marriage is a lot like a top restaurant or an exclusive beach. It only counts if you have to be someone special to get in. Once the hoi polloi discover it, it's all over.

In fact, they probably ought to cut back on marriage to make it even more exclusive. Demand a long-form birth certificate, literacy tests, and evidence of fiscal solvency on both sides of the family for three generations.

That would really spruce up the old institution.

Right?

[luvspeas]

4. Marriage is not mentioned in the constitution...

Unless they are planning to add an amendment....hmmmm...thought they were so fond of it the way it was.

[toddwv]

8. Great news!!!

I was wondering when they were finally going to get around to banning people like Rush Limbaugh, Donald Trump and Newt Gingrich from marrying again...and again...and again.

[queerart]

11. + 1000000000000 n/t

[LeftishBrit]

12. Defending marriage? Who is stopping them from being married?

(well, except in some cases, their soulmate in Argentina or somewhere, but I don't think that's what they mean!)