The US Attorney General has announced that homosexual couples will be given the same federal benefits as heterosexual married couples, even in States where same-sex ‘marriage’ has not been introduced.
Memorandum
In a speech in New York last weekend, Attorney General Eric Holder said that for the first time a memorandum will formally instruct “all Justice Department employees to give lawful same-sex marriages full and equal recognition to the greatest extent possible under the law".
Under the new measures all US States, including the 34 that do not allow same-sex ‘marriages,’ will be required to provide new federal benefits to homosexual couples, including survivor benefits and prison visits, where the federal government has jurisdiction.
Opposition
The latest move by the Obama administration has been criticised by many pro-family groups.
Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council said: “The extension of federal benefits, even in states that do not recognize same-sex couples is yet another illustration of the lawlessness of this administration. The Justice Department's decision highlights the need for Congress to pass legislation that would require federal agenciesto only recognize gay and lesbian marriages in states where it is legal.”
Sandy Rios, Director of Governmental Affairs for the American Family Association, added: "While the Holder Justice Department has no time to investigate Benghazi, where Americans lost their lives, it has plenty for gay 'rights. I guess you could say moneyand privilege for homosexuals trumps life and liberty for other Americans."
‘Dangerous’
Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, said: "The American public needs to realize how egregious and how dangerous these usurpations are and how far-reaching the implications can be," Brown said in a statement. "The changes being proposed here to a process as universally relevant as the criminal justice system serve as a potent reminder of why it is simply a lie to say that redefining marriage doesn't affect everyone in society."
Conflict
The Family Research Council’s Peter Sprigg warned that the move will also result in a conflict between state and federal law.
"It is doing something which the Supreme Court actually said the federal government should not do, which is the federal government putting a thumb on the scale and trying to influence the state's definition of marriage," he said.
Sources: