<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d11341962\x26blogName\x3dGay+Rights+Watch\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLACK\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://grwtemp.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://grwtemp.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d-6683271145376970135', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe", messageHandlersFilter: gapi.iframes.CROSS_ORIGIN_IFRAMES_FILTER, messageHandlers: { 'blogger-ping': function() {} } }); } }); </script>

Federal Gay Marriage Amendment Returns: (deja vu x2)

365gay.com reports:

(Washington) An amendment to the US constitution to ban same-sex marriage has been reintroduced in the House.

The measure was put forward by Rep. Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.) only days after a judge in San Francisco declared that barring gay marriage violated the California state constitution. (story)

Lungren, a former state attorney general, called the ruling by Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer "astonishing" and said that the US constitution needs to be amended to prevent courts throughout the country from ruling on gay marriage.

"The courts aren't democratic institutions," he said.

The proposed amendment amendment would bar same-sex marriage and prevent states from being forced to recognize gay marriages performed elsewhere.

Lungren's proposed amendment reads: "Marriage in the United States Shall consist only of a legal union of a man and a woman.

"No court of the United States or of any State shall have jurisdiction to determine whether this Constitution or the constitution of any State requires that the legal incidents of marriage be conferred upon any union other than a legal union between one man and one woman.

"No State shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State concerning a union between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage, or as having the legal incidents of marriage, under the laws of such other State."

If passed, it would mark the first time the Constitution was amended to single out a group of Americans for unequal treatment.

Earlier this week President Bush renewed his call for an amendment. (story)

"Americans don't want the Constitution turned into a tool for discrimination," said Human Rights Campaign spokesperson David M. Smith.

"Congress should be spending its time protecting families, not ensuring their vulnerability under law."

A Senate version of the proposed amendment was reintroduced in January. (story)

Attempts by Republicans in Congress to pass a proposed amendment failed last July. (story) At the time GOP leaders vowed they would keep bringing the measure back until it passes.

According to exit polling in November 2004, 60 percent of Americans support either civil unions or marriage equality for same-sex couple.

by Paul Johnson 365Gay.com Washington Bureau Chief
« Home | Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »
| Previous | Next »

» Post a Comment