News Release – Where is PA Attorney General’s Name?August 30, 2012 // afaofpa // Homosexual Agenda
For Immediate Release: August 30, 2012
Contact: Diane Gramley 1.814.271.9078 or 1.814.437.5355
Where is Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Name on this List?
(Harrisburg) — Fifteen states have filed an amicus brief in support of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), urging the United States Supreme Court to review a lower court decision striking down DOMA. The American Family Association of Pennsylvania (AFA of PA), a statewide advocate for natural marriage, contacted the PA Attorney General’s office expressing concern that Pennsylvania was not on the 15-state brief.
“Where is Linda Kelly’s name on this amicus brief? Pennsylvanians believe marriage between one man and one woman should be protected on the federal as well as the state level. Steps here in Pennsylvania have not successfully been taken to protect marriage through a needed constitutional amendment, thus to not be a part of defending the federal DOMA is a disservice to the citizens for which Kelly acts as the chief law enforcement officer,” remarked Diane Gramley, president of the AFA of PA.
The federal DOMA, which passed in 1996 with broad bipartisan majorities and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, defines marriage as between one man and one woman for the purposes of federal law and ensures that states do not have to recognize same-sex marriages entered into in states that have redefined the institution. The US Department of Justice, with the blessing of President Obama, has chosen not to fulfill its obligation to defend the laws of the land and refuses to defend DOMA. This situation forced the House of Representatives to step in and provide a defense.
The states’ brief in Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group v Gill is critical of the First Circuit Court of Appeals decision to invalidate the section of DOMA dealing with the federal definition of marriage which differentiates between marriage and other relationships on the basis of their capacity for procreation — a difference which the First Circuit has deemed constitutionally illegitimate. The brief also points out that if the First Circuit decision is allowed to stand, it could threaten the marriage laws in at least 42 states which have the procreative rationale as a critical factor.
“This is a crucial case in the defense of marriage and Attorney General Linda Kelly should have been a part of this important amicus brief. The ultimate goal of homosexual activists and their friends in the courts is to legalize homosexual so-called marriage in all 50 states. What better way than to set up the scenario to attack the laws in 42 states,” concluded Gramley.
# # #