SENATE HEARS TESTIMONY ON A GAY MARRIAGE AMENDMENT: The New York Times

Senate Republican leaders said Wednesday that they would aggressively pursue a constitutional amendment banning gay marriages despite Democratic arguments that the proposal is divisive, unnecessary and a distraction from more pressing issues. ...

But the obstacles facing an amendment quickly became clear at a Senate hearing on the issue, the first since President Bush endorsed the concept last week. ...

Maggie Gallagher, an author and president of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, in her testimony said, "Marriage is a national issue because marriage is a key social institution." She added, "Without a common, national definition of marriage, our marriage culture will be fragmented as judges and public officials impose their own definition of marriage."

But Hilary Shelton, director of the Washington Bureau of the N.A.A.C.P., said his organization was "greatly disappointed that President George Bush and others have decided to enter this election cycle by endorsing an amendment that would forever write discrimination into the U.S. Constitution, rather than focusing on the crucial problems and challenges that affect the lives of all of us."

A professor from Yale Law School, Lea Brilmayer, undermined a main rationale offered for an amendment, that the "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution could force states that do not allow gay marriages to recognize those from states where they are legal. Ms. Brilmayer said there had not been a single case of a state being put in that position, noting that states had long been able to refuse recognition of marriages between cousins and even recently divorced individuals.

more
posted by Eve at 9:19 AM VOTE

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home