Strong Bi-Partisan Sponsorship Reflects The Fact that the Future of Marriage In America Is More Important Than Partisan Politics
WASHINGTON, DC – The Alliance for Marriage (AFM) has announced the reintroduction of the Federal Marriage Amendment to the United States Constitution in the House of Representatives with strong bi-partisan support.
The reintroduction of the Federal Marriage Amendment comes in anticipation of an imminent decision in Goodridge v. MA Dept of Public Health — a case that activists openly declare they intend to use as the foundation for constitutional challenges to all of America’s marriage laws. For example, the Boston Bar Association has publicly called for “federal constitutional claims” to be brought against all state and federal marriage laws in the aftermath of a likely victory in this case by early summer.
The bi-partisan cosponsors of the Federal Marriage Amendment are: Collin Peterson (D-MN), Mike McIntyre (D-NC), Ralph Hall (D-TX), Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO), Jo Ann Davis (R-VA), David Vitter (R-LA).
Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this 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.
|“Civil Unions” “Domestic Partnerships”||BENEFITS ASSOCIATED WITH MARRIAGE||EMPLOYEE BENEFITS OFFERED BY BUSINESSES|
|IMPOSED BY COURTS||Sentence 1 Prohibits||Sentence 2 Prohibits||Sentence 2 Prohibits||Unaffected|
|ACTION OF STATE LEGISLATURE||Sentence 1 Prohibits||Decision of State Legislature||Decision of State Legislature||Unaffected|
The first sentence simply states that marriage in the United States consists of the union of male and female. The second sentence ensures that the democratic process at the state level will continue to determine the allocation of the benefits associated with marriage. But the courts are precluded from distorting existing constitutional or statutory law into a requirement that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be reallocated pursuant to a judicial decree. The Federal Marriage Amendment has no impact at all on benefits offered by private businesses and corporations.
The Federal Marriage Amendment is a reasonable response to the crisis for our democratic society created by those who would use the courts to overcome public opinion with respect to marriage. Gays and lesbians have a right to live as they choose. But they don’t have a right to redefine marriage for our entire society.
It is very important to remember that the entire effort to undermine the legal status of marriage in the courts is premised upon constitutional law. For example, activist organizations openly admit their plans to use the Equal Protection and Full Faith and Credit clauses of the United States Constitution to eventually impose same-sex “marriage” and “civil unions” on every state in the nation. The only question is whether the constitutional status of marriage will be determined by unelected judges or the American people.