Public Law 104-199
104th Congress
An Act
To define and protect the institution of marriage.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Defense of Marriage Act''.
SEC. 2. POWERS RESERVED TO THE STATES.
(a) In General.--Chapter 115 of title 28, United States Code, is
amended by adding after section 1738B the following:
``Sec. 1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect
thereof
``No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian
tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or
judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe
respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is
treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory,
possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such
relationship.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of
chapter 115 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by inserting
after the item relating to section 1738B the following new item:
``1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect
thereof.''.
SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE.
(a) In General.--Chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 7. Definition of `marriage' and `spouse'
``In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any
ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative
bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word `marriage' means
only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife,
and the word `spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is
a husband or a wife.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of
chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is amended by inserting after
the item relating to section 6 the following new item:
``7. Definition of `marriage' and `spouse'.''.
Approved September 21, 1996.
HOUSE REPORTS: No. 104-664 (Comm. on the Judiciary).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 142 (1996):
July 11, 12, considered and passed House.
Sept. 10, considered and passed Senate.
source
Branden does a great job balancing facts with personal anecdotes. His entry about getting "cannabis" and "cerebrus" confused was entertaining. This being said, he also laced the article with information.
ReplyDeleteBranden also is able to make the information within his article relatable to his audience. With inflation, he offered real life examples, such as the price of gas, as well as funny ways to remember his article, like the "Ducktales" video.
Branden's blog is informative yet creative: a perfect combination for a blog. It is memorable and stands out to the audience, but teaches them in a way that is not preachy. His reasoning has backed up evidence, like when he discussed Obama's promises to the American people. He used that evidence to justify his point of view. Branden's blog is an example of what we have learned and been assigned in this class.
COMMENT TO STUDENT EVALUATION:
ReplyDeleteI find your blog hit and miss; it's easy to tell when you're in a hurry and when you're actually committed to the topic. I've noticed there's several topics that have been missed altogether.