Skip to comments.Senate Panel Hears Testimony on Marriage Law
Posted on 09/04/2003 10:12:15 AM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife
A U.S. Senate subcommittee on Thursday afternoon will hear testimony on whether a constitutional amendment is needed to "defend" the Defense of Marriage Act.
That law -- signed by former President Bill Clinton in 1996 -- defines marriage as the legal union between one man and one woman; and it says the states do not have to recognize same-sex "marriages" conducted elsewhere.
Some conservative groups insist that the federal law is not enough, especially in light of recent court rulings that advance the homosexual agenda. They say a constitutional amendment is needed to protect the intent of the Defense of Marriage Act.
But others disagree.
The Log Cabin Republicans this week launched a nationwide lobbying campaign urging fellow Republicans to reject a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
"The message from Log Cabin members and allies across the nation is clear and unequivocal; hijacking the sacred Constitution of the United States of America to score political points with the radical right is completely unnecessary and will only serve to divide the American family," said Log Cabin Republican Executive Director Patrick Guerriero in a press release.
According to the Log Cabin Republicans, even former Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.), the author of the Defense of Marriage Act, is on record as opposing a constitutional amendment -- calling it "both unnecessary and needlessly intrusive and punitive."
"There is nothing conservative about unnecessarily tinkering with the U.S Constitution and nothing conservative about discouraging stable relationships," Guerriero said.
A group called the Alliance for Marriage is the principal backer of the Defense of Marriage Act. On its website, it calls the law "a reasonable response to the crisis...created by those who would use the courts to overcome public opinion with respect to marriage."
The Alliance says homosexuals have a right to live as they choose, "but they don't have a right to redefine marriage for our entire society."
The text of the federal marriage amendment reads: "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither the Constitution or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."
The Family Research Council calls the "gay marriage" debate the most important battle facing our nation since Roe v. Wade.
"With the growing likelihood that a U.S. court will declare a right to same-sex 'marriage,' the Federal Marriage Amendment has become a necessity," said FRC President Tony Perkins, who planned to attend Thursday's Senate hearing.
Ratification of the proposed amendment would require the approval of both chambers of Congress as well as the legislatures of 38 states.
Speakers scheduled to testify at Thursday's Senate hearing include the Rev. Ray Hammond II, pastor of the Bethel AME Church in Boston; Maggie Gallagher, president of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy; and Gregory Coleman, the former solicitor general of Texas.
Why even bother. Marriage has become little more than an expensive joke since no-fault divorce became the law of the land. So now what, they're going to try and defend something that they have spent billions of dollars destroying for 30 years?! Get real.
Scripter will be off line occasionally between now and the middle of September. I've agreed to help him out by running his homosexual agenda ping list.
|Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links|
|Homosexual Agenda Index (bump list)|
|Homosexual Agenda Keyword Search|
|All FreeRepublic Bump Lists|
A simple freepmail is all it takes to subscribe to or unsubscribe from scripter's homosexual agenda ping list. If you wish to be added to the list in scripter's absence, please FReepmail me.