Revised Federal Marriage Amendment draws mixed reviews_40504

Posted: 4/02/04

Revised Federal Marriage Amendment draws mixed reviews

By Robert Marus

ABP Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON (ABP)--Sponsors of a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage announced a change they say clarifies the proposal, but the amendment's opponents call the change a ruse to gain more support for the effort.

image_pdfimage_print

Posted: 4/02/04

Revised Federal Marriage Amendment draws mixed reviews

By Robert Marus

ABP Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON (ABP)–Sponsors of a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage announced a change they say clarifies the proposal, but the amendment's opponents call the change a ruse to gain more support for the effort.

Sen. Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) and Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colo.) announced they would alter the wording of the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment to make sure it allowed states room to enact marriage-like “civil unions” for gay couples.

Allard, the amendment's chief Senate sponsor, said the new language would “make it clear, without any ambiguity, that the states” would be able to enact civil unions.

Musgrave agreed, and said the sponsors' intent was never to ban all civil unions, but simply “to prevent states from being forced to recognize out-of-state contracts”–such as same-sex marriages performed in other states–that conflict with the state's social policy.

The head of an organization pushing the amendment said the effort is “not about benefits” that would be denied to gay or lesbian couples in many states if civil unions or domestic partnerships were outlawed nationwide.

“It is about marriage,” Matt Daniels, president of the Alliance for Marriage, told reporters. “We don't want to carry a road map in our car that tells us what marriage is by what state we're in.”

But a spokesman for one organization opposing the amendment said the changes are insufficient.

“Changing the constitution is always extreme,” said Steven Fisher, director of communications for the Human Rights Campaign. HRC is the nation's largest gay civil-rights organization.

“For over 200 years, the Constitution has been amended to expand rights, not take them away,” Fisher continued. “The amendment denies the rights and responsibilities of marriage to same-sex couples. And there's no way to change that except to defeat the amendment.”

Allard and Musgrave asserted the revised language of the amendment restricts “activist judges” from reading marriage or domestic partnership rights into federal or state constitutions without explicit authorization from legislatures.

One day after the updated version of the amendment was introduced, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) convened a hearing of the measure before the Senate Judiciary Committee's sub-panel on constitutional matters.

Cornyn and other speakers said the amendment is necessary because recent Supreme Court decisions suggest a majority of justices eventually will rule that limiting marriage to heterosexual couples violates the Constitution's equal-protection provisions.

“Either you believe that traditional marriage is about discrimination and therefore must be invalidated by the courts, or you believe traditional marriage is about children and must be protected by the Constitution,” Cornyn said.

Noting that lawsuits challenging state marriage laws have been filed in federal courts in dozens of states, he added, “Now that the threat is a federal threat, a federal constitutional amendment is the only way to preserve traditional marriage laws nationwide.”

Dick Richardson, an African Methodist Episcopal Church minister and charity administrator from Boston, told the panel he took umbrage at claims that limiting marriage to heterosexuals is discriminatory.

“As an African-American, I know something about discrimination,” Richardson told the panel.

“The traditional institution of marriage is not about discrimination, and I find it offensive to call it that.”

But Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), an African-American Baptist minister and veteran of the Civil Rights Movement's most famous battles, disagreed.

“Discrimination is discrimination,” Lewis said.

“For one, I have fought too hard and too long against discrimination based on race and color not to stand up against discrimination based on sexual orientation.”

News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.


We seek to connect God’s story and God’s people around the world. To learn more about God’s story, click here.

Send comments and feedback to Eric Black, our editor. For comments to be published, please specify “letter to the editor.” Maximum length for publication is 300 words.

More from Baptist Standard