Gay marriage on House agenda pre-electio

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Gay marriage on House agenda pre-electio
19
Wed, 07-07-2004 - 9:52pm

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apwashington_story.asp?category=1153&slug=Congress%20Gay%20Marriage


Wednesday, July 7, 2004 · Last updated 3:34 p.m. PT


Gay marriage on House agenda pre-election


By MARY DALRYMPLE
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER


WASHINGTON -- House Republican leaders who were once unenthusiastic about President Bush's call for a constitutional amendment against recognizing gay marriages now say they plan to bring the idea to a vote just before next November's election.


Senate Republicans want to force votes on the amendment in the next two weeks, just before Democrats convene to nominate Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry as their candidate to unseat Bush.


Also in July, the House plans to debate a measure that would give state courts rather than certain federal ones jurisdiction of gay marriage cases.


"We feel like marriage is under attack. Marriage is a spiritual bond between one man and one woman," House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, said Wednesday.


"I came to realize, in the end, we're going to have to do a constitutional amendment if we want to protect marriage."


He said House GOP leaders expect to debate the constitutional amendment in September.


The Senate has scheduled time in the next two weeks for debate on its own proposed amendment, though sponsors acknowledge the difficulty of getting the two-thirds majority needed for approval.


President Bush announced his support for an amendment in February.


The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay political organization, has begun a television and Internet advertising campaign aimed at defeating the congressional efforts.


The amendment "is unnecessary, discriminatory and undermines the Constitution," said the group's president, Cheryl Jacques.


Kerry and his vice presidential candidate, Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, oppose same-sex marriage but support civil unions. Neither would support a constitutional amendment.


Amendments to the Constitution require approval by two-thirds majorities in the House and Senate and ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures.


The bill dealing with jurisdiction of court cases would leave decisions about legalizing gay marriage in state courts and prevent federal judges from hearing cases that challenge the Defense of Marriage Act. It defines marriage in federal law as the union between a man and a woman.


Rep. John Hostettler, R-Ind., has written legislation to remove marriage from certain federal courts.


In a May statement explaining the bill, he said, "Simply put, if federal courts don't have jurisdiction over marriage issues, they can't hear them. And if they can't hear cases regarding marriage policy, they can't redefine this sacred institution and establish a national precedent for homosexual marriage."

 Sprinkler cl-nwtreehugger   


Community Leader:  In The News Newspaper 3  & Sports Talk Baseball 


I can also be found at Washington Washington   ,


TV ShowsTV 2 & QOTW Question Mark


 Sewing   Be sure to check out the CraftsPaint Pallet


messageboard for fun, creative & unique projects!






Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-09-2003
Thu, 07-08-2004 - 12:09pm
<>


Congratulations to you both! :-)

"Without music, life is a journey through the desert"...

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-09-2003
Thu, 07-08-2004 - 12:16pm
Excellent post suemox! I think many people don't take marriage vows seriously these days. It's almost like it's a fad or something... very sad. I've never been married before, and though I know it takes a lot of hard work, I guess some people just aren't up to the challenge and they would just rather divorce. So, I have a hard time understanding why a 55 hour marriage (or whatever Brit's first one was!) is all fine in many people's eyes, but the marriage of two people of the same sex is not.

"Without music, life is a journey through the desert"...

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 07-08-2004 - 12:18pm

<<>>


Frankly, I'm a bit disappointed.


We were all prepared to see some sort of apocolypse, or at least to see civilization in ruin after we returned from getting married in Niagara Falls.


Imagine our surprise when the world seemed unchanged!

________________________________________________


"If you don't stand up for something, you'll lie down for anything." -- Bob Day, Marriage Equality Rally, Rochester NY

Help in the fight against a constitutional amendment!


<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

________________________________________________

"If you don't stand up for something, you'll lie down for anything." -- B

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 07-08-2004 - 12:24pm

We wrote our own ceremony.

________________________________________________

"If you don't stand up for something, you'll lie down for anything." -- B

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Tue, 07-13-2004 - 11:08am

Gay marriage vote appears doomed


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5416297/


Senate leaders unable to agree on procedure

Senate Majority Leader

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Tue, 07-13-2004 - 11:38am

"the Allard amendment is a divisive election-year gambit. Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., blamed President Bush for supporting the measure, calling it a “desperate tactic to divide Americans in an attempt to salvage his faltering re-election.” "


Agreed.

cl-Libraone~

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
Wed, 07-14-2004 - 6:54pm
I have to agree. Equality is equality. If the United States, and Canada can sit there and preach equality, then why is who gets married to who such a big deal? It's equal rights. It should not be left up the a politician's feelings and views on the subject. They are irrelivant. Like I said, equal rights are equal rights, and I believe that people should practise what they preach, but leave it out of politics. Are they trying to better their countries, or are they trying to better their views of their countries?
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
Wed, 07-14-2004 - 7:01pm
Sorry to be a little bit against what everyone is saying. I believe in equal rights, obviously, but when it comes to gay marriage in the church, my sincerest appologies, but I have to say no. As a christian, I know it is not for me to judge, and so I will not, but I also know that the bible denounces the union of two people of the same sex. Sorry to all who disagree with me, but as they say, there should never be a connection between state and church, and so if a homosexual couple wishes to be married by a j.o.p, that is one thing, but how can one expect a minister to marry them when it is against their beliefs? Isn't this part of what we are fighting for?
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 07-14-2004 - 8:24pm

Please refer me to the part of the bible that prohibits the "union" of homosexuals.

________________________________________________

"If you don't stand up for something, you'll lie down for anything." -- B

Pages