Papantonio: Equal Protection Should Prove DOMA Unconstitutional

[GoLeft TV]

Ring of Fire’s Mike Papantonio talks with progressive radio host Ed Schultz about the narrow-minded views of the U.S. Supreme Court, and how our democracy demands equal rights for all of our citizens.

[JDPriestly]

1. We redefined policeman and fireman to include women because applying

the traditional definition was sexist and did not provide equal protection to men and women regardless of gender.

Why can't we redefine "marriage" to include a commitment to a person of the same sex so that we do not deny equal protection either to a man or to a woman in a relationship just because the other person in the relationship is of the same gender?

We redefined lots of words that previously contained the word man so that we could do away with discrimination against women.

What a weak argument, Justice Roberts. It is inconsistent with prior decisions on gender discrimination. That is not a significant reason for discrimination based on gender.