![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
enteleinhttp://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/14/politics/campaigns/14MARR.html?th
I'm not really surprised at this program, as much as it makes me feel angry and annoyed, but I do have to wonder at the turn of conservatism's "get the government the hell out of my life" towards "... except for people who are not me." It's been cranking along steadily like this for some time now, and I guess the election year frenzy is inspiring lots of federal obnoxiousness.
Administration officials say they are planning an extensive election-year initiative to promote marriage, especially among low-income couples, and they are weighing whether President Bush should promote the plan next week in his State of the Union address.
For months, administration officials have worked with conservative groups on the proposal, which would provide at least $1.5 billion for training to help couples develop interpersonal skills that sustain "healthy marriages."
...
Dr. Horn said that federal money for marriage promotion would be available only to heterosexual couples. As a federal official, he said, he is bound by a 1996 statute, the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage for any program established by Congress. The law states, "The word `marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife."
But Dr. Horn said: "I don't have any problem with the government providing support services to gay couples under other programs. If a gay couple had a child and they were poor, they might be eligible for food stamps or cash assistance."
I'm not really surprised at this program, as much as it makes me feel angry and annoyed, but I do have to wonder at the turn of conservatism's "get the government the hell out of my life" towards "... except for people who are not me." It's been cranking along steadily like this for some time now, and I guess the election year frenzy is inspiring lots of federal obnoxiousness.
