House Votes to Curb Same-Sex Marriage (July, 2004)

MyWayNews ^

[Happy2BMe]

Jul 22, 5:05 PM (ET)

By Thomas Ferraro

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Republican-led U.S. House of Representatives approved a bill to curb same-sex marriage on Thursday after rejecting concerns the measure may be unconstitutional.

On a vote of 233-194, the House sent the proposal to the Senate where members of both parties said it will likely die. But it could help rev up an election-year issue.

Last week, on a related front, the Senate easily blocked a bid pushed by President Bush to amend the Constitution to define marriage as a union strictly between a man and a woman.

The House measure, also supported by the administration, offers a different approach. It would forbid federal judges from requiring one state to recognize a same-sex marriage licensed in another.

Democrats accused Bush and fellow Republicans of pushing the proposals merely to rally their conservative base for the November congressional and presidential contests.

"This debate is about a national election," Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, said in opposing the bill. "We are playing with fire with this bill, and that fire could destroy the nation we love."

"I rise in defense of the Constitution, in defense of the separation of powers," said House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat. "What's next? No judicial review of laws that restrict freedom of speech or religion?"

House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican, said, "To insinuate this bill is an attack on the foundation of our government is just plain wrong."

Sensenbrenner said the framers of the Constitution gave Congress power to limit judicial authority.

Saying Thomas Jefferson had voiced "fears about judicial powers being unchecked," Sensenbrenner said, "This bill is a check on judicial power."

While Democrats called the bill unprecedented, backers said Congress had moved before to limit courts' authority on matters from cleaning up hazardous waste to protecting trees.

"If limiting the jurisdiction of the federal courts is good enough to protect trees, shouldn't it be good enough to protect a state's marriage policy?" Sensenbrenner said.

The House bill would prohibit federal courts, even the Supreme Court, from considering challenges to the 1996 U.S. Defense of Marriage Act, which empowered each state to decide on its own whether to allow same-sex marriage.

Opponents contend the bill would violate the equal protection clause by cutting off from federal judicial review a law affecting a specific minority.

"Congress cannot and should not shut the federal courthouse door to married gay and lesbian couples," said Chris Anders of the American Civil Liberties Union.

The bill was drafted in response to what backers denounce as "activist" judges and local officials who permit same-sex marriage. Critics say such unions devalue child-rearing, traditional marriages.

Bush in February called on Congress to approve an amendment to ban same-sex marriages after Massachusetts' highest court ruled gay couples had a right to wed and San Francisco issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The actions triggered lawsuits nationwide.

Polls show most Americans oppose same-sex marriage, but split on whether there should be a constitutional amendment to ban it. Surveys also find Americans believe several other issues are far more important, such as health care and the economy.

[Happy2BMe]

'Bout time!

[goldwaterlives]

good

[Happy2BMe]

'Democrats accused Bush and fellow Republicans of pushing the (anti-gay legislation) proposals merely to rally their conservative base for the November congressional and presidential contests.'

_______________________________________

Isn't it just like a Democrat to accuse a Republican of being "tricky" when it comes to saving the core of our society - THE FAMILY! - ping.

[TBarnett34]

If the Democrats controlled the house, Reuters would report this as 'A valiant bi-partisan effort coordinated by the Democratic majority in the house'.

Ugh, how I hate the lamestream media.

[potlatch]

[ICX]

"This debate is about a national election," Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, said in opposing the bill. "We are playing with fire with this bill, and that fire could destroy the nation we love."

What is he talking about? Soviet Russia went down in flames a decade and a half ago.

[Happy2BMe]

DOES YOUR REPRESENTATIVE SUPPORT HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE? YOU CAN FIND OUT HERE.

[ZULU]

Now watch the Republican "girly-Boys" in the Senate help the Dems defeat this.

[greasepaint]

What is the status of the 1996
'defence of marriage' act.
Constitutional?
Tested in court?

[TBarnett34]

I live in Georgia, it's safe to say that aside from our communist inner-city Atlanta reps, we're a nice safe haven for traditional marriage.

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping - More good news. But what will the Republican girly-boys do? (borrowed from one comment down the thread.)

Let me know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.

Please note comment #7 from Happy - check and see how your representative voted.

[Arnold Zephel]

Here is the break down on HR3313 or Marriage Protection Act of 2004.

	Yeas	Nays	Present	No Vote
Republicans	206	17		5
Democrats	27	176		3
Independants	0	1		0
Totals	233	194		8

You can find out how your individual representative voted by going here

[Wampus SC]

Here's a good news BTTT.

[Wampus SC]

'Democrats accused Bush and fellow Republicans of pushing the (anti-gay legislation) proposals merely to rally their conservative base for the November congressional and presidential contests.'

What's bothering them is they know it's going to work.

BTW, it's always good for a laugh when politicians accuse politicians of being politicians.

[MeekOneGOP]

DemocRATS - what a bunch of Girlie Men whiners !

[MeekOneGOP]

Thanks ! My guy voted FOR the bill:

Johnson, Sam