Senate Judiciary Panel Backs Constitutional Amendmt on Marriage

[TaleWgnDg]

.

Senate judiciary panel backs constitutional amendment on marriage

Jeannie Shawl, Jurist News, November 10, 2005, at 11:45 AM ET

(JURIST NEWS) The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommitee on the Constitution (official website) approved a proposed constitutional amendment, the Marriage Protection Amendment (.pdf format, AdobeReader® required), in a 5-4 vote Wednesday. The amendment, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, will now go before the full judiciary committee and is expected to come up for a vote in the U.S. Senate next year. U.S. Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) (official website), chair of the (U.S. Senate) Judiciary Committee, voted in favor of allowing the amendment to proceed, and said that although he opposes the amendment it shouldn't "be bottled up" in committee.

The amendment wouldn't take effect until it is approved by two-thirds of the U.S. House and Senate and ratified by at least 38 state legislatures. Critics of the marriage amendment say the decision on whether to recognize same-sex marriage (JURIST news archive) should be left up to the states. Nineteen states have passed state constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage, including Texas, where voters approved a same-sex marriage ban (JURIST report; TX Proposition 2 text) earlier this week. AP has more.
.
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2005/11/senate-judiciary-panel-backs.php
.

.

The proposed so-called "Marriage Protection Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution:

"Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman."
.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:sj1is.txt.pdf (.pdf format, AdobeReader® required)
.

.

As a Family Law attorney, I will add that this is one hell of a lethal blow to gays and their families in America if passed. It is a blanket discriminatory enactment. This U.S. constitutional amendment will not only put a lethal arrow through the heart of same-sex marriage in America, it may also imperil all gains in Family Law and other areas of law for GLBTs, e.g., domestic partnerships, civil unions, healthcare benefits, child custody, and more. The list goes on.

I strongly doubt that it will become a part of our U.S. constitution. However, I urge that all DUers work to see that it never does.


.

[IndianaGreen]

1. Fundies are going to target divorce next (divorce too easy)

Per thread posted by sonicx:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1916300

[TaleWgnDg]

2. Of course, so why not model divorce after Massachusetts?

.
Of course, so why not model divorce after Massachusetts? Massachusetts where same-sex marriage is legal and no-fault divorce is legal. Massachusetts where the divorce rate is one of the lowest in the entire country!! Trash those stupid so-called "covenant marriages" and join the 21st century like the northeast section of our country and the rest of the planet!

P.S. The bible belt has the highest divorce rate, the highest out-of-wedlock births by teenagers, the highest domestic violence . . . shall I continue? The worst bunch of Neanderthal, knuckle-dragging, misogynist, hypocrites on the entire planet . . . right up there w/ their religious counterparts, The Taliban.

.

[IndianaGreen]

4. and the highest number of child molestation cases

My former roommate was raped as a child by a leading civic and religious man in Stuttgart, Arkansas. She didn't go public because she would not have been believed when the perpetrator is a big man in the church and in the town.

[salin]

3. These guys don't get it...

the political context has changed. More folks (albeit not in Tx) are starting to view the pandering to the far religious right as a threat to the country. These emboldened senators still think that this is what "wins" for them (it doesn't). The more they pander to the religious right in high profile ways, the more they damage their own party - and they, and the wh, haven't yet figured that out.

[Freedom_from_Chains]

7. Shhhh, don't give them a heads up, let them keep hanging themselves

[Democat]

5. Never let a Republican abuse the Constitution

Republicans want to take away the rights of Americans.

Republicans support the nanny state where the government makes all of your private decisions for you.

[rodeodance]

6. it still amazes me that some Senators do not this as blantant discriminat-

ion-agaist some Americans.

[Sgent]

8. The Senators may not

their constiuents on the other hand....

When even Oregon passes a gay marrige ammendment, its hard for a Senator to vote no.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

9. 06 election cycle KICK OFF!>>>>Guns, Gays and God...yay

[Laelth]

11. That's it!

The Repukes don't really want this amendment to be ratified, nor do they expect that it will be ratified. They just want to get their opponents on record in opposition to it so that they can bash them as anti-family. This is a pure political ploy, but when your central party platform plank is to impoverish the masses at the expense of a very few, you've got to come up with something to get people to vote for you.

And here it is.

-Laelth

[cantstandbush]

10. They are desparate! Bushcos trying anything to get poll numbers up.

It's not going to work. Some things are just not important anymore when you are losing your children to drugs, wars, and lies. Abortions at the max can only affect 3% of the entire population and it is an issue that has been blown way out of proportion as has gay marriage. And I don't think the NRA can force any loclity to vote for guns if the majority of the people living there don't want to.
These RW wackos have run our nation for the last 12 years and look what it has gotten us. It's time to unseat everyone of them and make their supporters ashamed to show their faces.