Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Response from Conrad Burns (R-MT) re: FMA (sounds like he's leaning NO)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Ediacara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-21-04 11:16 PM
Original message
Response from Conrad Burns (R-MT) re: FMA (sounds like he's leaning NO)
Edited on Sun Mar-21-04 11:17 PM by DinoBoy
I had called Burns office a few weeks ago while attempting to help the DU tally of Senators for and against the FMA legislation. The letter seems to be a reiteration of the somewhat vague story I got from his staff which is:

1) Burns doesn't like gay marriage, but:
2) Amending the constitution to stop gay marriage is stupid.

So he's still sitting on the fence, but sounds like he is a possible no vote on the FMA.

The text of the letter is as follows (all emphasis mine):

---------------

Dear Mr DinoBoy:

Thank you for contacting my office regarding same sex marriages. It was good to hear from you.

As you know, the issue of same sex marriage has come to the political forefront because of the recent Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision. Since that ruling, there has been a drive towards amending the Constitution to prevent gay and lesbian couples from ever legally marrying in the United States. While I beleve that marriage should be defined as a union between a man and a woman, I have great concerns over amending the Constitution.

The federal government has already adequately dealt with this difficult issue by passing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). DOMA provides that no State shall be required to give effect to a law of any other State with respect to same-sex marriage. This legislation ensures that the individual states, not the federal government, are able to decide for themselves which marriages to legally recognize. In addition, DOMA defines the word "marriage" as being between only a man and a woman in reference to federal laws.

I appreciate that this is a very sensative issue, which is creating intense discourse throughout the country. However, just because an issue is receiving a lot of attention, it does not necisarily justify repetative federal legislation. At this time, instead of focusing on duplicating past legislation, the federal government needs to focus on winning the war on terror and getting the American economy back in high gear.

Thanks again for contacting me. Please don't hesitate to call or write with any other questions or concerns you may have.

Sincerely.

Conrad Burns
United States Senator


-------------

ON EDIT: spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC