Posted on 09/30/2004 11:34:09 PM PDT by ETERNAL WARMING
QUEERLY BELOVED Marriage protection rejected by House Constitutional amendment fails to get two-thirds vote
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: October 1, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
WASHINGTON – A constitutional amendment defining marriage as an institution between one man and one woman was defeated in the House of Representatives last night as it fell 49 votes short of the two-thirds needed.
The vote was 227-186.
"God created Adam and Eve, He didn't create Adam and Steve," said Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., on behalf of a measure that supporters said was designed to protect an institution as old as civilization itself.
Democrats countered that Republicans were motivated by election-year politics as much as anything, particularly since a Senate vote this year ended any immediate chance the amendment could be sent to the states for ratification.
Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the Democratic whip, accused GOP leaders of "raw political cynicism" and said they hoped to "create the fodder for a demagogic political ad."
Bush issued a statement expressing disappointment with the vote's outcome.
"Because activist judges and local officials in some parts of the country are seeking to redefine marriage for the rest of the country, we must remain vigilant in defending traditional marriage," the president said.
The measure drew the support of 191 Republicans and 36 Democrats. Voting against it were 158 Democrats, 27 Republicans and one independent.
Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, was the principal speaker on behalf of the measure. DeLay said the need for congressional action was "forced upon us by activist judges trying to legislate from the bench." He noted that under 1996 legislation passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton, marriage is defined as between a man of a woman.
"One would think this would be the end of the story. But it is not," DeLay said. The law is "under an incessant and coordinated attack in the federal courts," where he said judges feel a greater "responsibility to their own political ideology than the Constitution."
"The limitations of traditional marriage rest not on an intent to discriminate, but on what is most beneficial for society and children as evidenced by volumes of social science research," added Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo.
"Traditional marriage is worth preserving, because the nuclear family is far and away the best environment in which to raise children. Every child deserves both a father and a mother," said Musgrave, whose persistent advocacy for the measure has gained her national notice unusual for a first-term lawmaker.
Opponents saw it differently.
"We feel love and we feel it in a way different than you," said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., who is openly homosexual. "We feel it with someone of the same sex, male or female, and we look at your institution of marriage and we see the joy it brings. How do we hurt you when we share it?"
"This is a partisan exercise to distract the American people from the Republicans' record of failure," said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat. "This amendment is malicious," Pelosi said. "It is motivated by an animus toward lesbians and gays. It is a sad moment that those clinging to power want to use that to divide the American people for what they perceive to be an electoral advantage."
A majority did support the amendment. But a Constitutional amendment requires a super-majority.
I suspect that the House will have more amendment supporters after this election. How many more is uncertain.
Thank you much for your post. I understand that. My original comment stands.
Ron Paul voted against it!!
I THOUGHT WE HAD A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY?
Oh that was a RINO majority...I remember now..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.