Del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Reddit
Newsvine
co.mments
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage.
Other Bill Titles (1 more) 12/19/2007--Introduced.
Constitutional Amendment - Defines marriage in the United States as consisting only of a legal union of one man and one woman. See Full Bill Text
Sponsor
Committees
Amendments
This bill has no amendments.
Bill Status
| Introduced |  | Voted on by House |
| December 19, 2007 |
Users tracking H.J.Res.74 (16) are also tracking:
| People | Bills | Issues |
|---|---|---|
|
In the News
We are not currently finding any news articles on this topic using our daily automated search of Google News. However, if you know of a relevant news article to display here, OpenCongress site editors have the ability to add it manually. Simply e-mail us the web address of this page and the web address of your suggested news article: We'll post relevant links as quickly as possible. Also, if this topic is important to you, you could write a letter to the editor -- if a news article refers this specific topic by name, a link to that news article is likely to appear here soon.
Information made available by:
Blog Coverage
February 04, 2008 Joint Resolution to Protect Marriage
On December 19, 2007, Representative Louie Gohmert (R-TX) introduced HJRes. 74, a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the United States Constitution relating to marriage. The text of the proposed amendment states that "Marriage ...
Source: Life, Liberty and Family
December 18, 2007 Bill Action: Introduced: HJRes. 74: Proposing an amendment to the ...
Rep. Louis Gohmert [R-TX] introduced this bill. [This event matched these trackers: Active Legislation ]
December 18, 2007 HJ Res. 74, Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the ...
HJ Res. 74 would propose an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage.... Vote on This Bill: For | Against.
Information made available by:
Rating Filter: 5
Comments
I fail to understand what this bill will accomplish. If this bill passes, it will amend the constitution to declare marriage between an man and a woman. Then what? Do gay people suddenly disappear? Will they stop yelling about "equal rights"? Will they just "accept the laws"? No. Passing this bill will not make anyone happy. This is a waste of time.
In all the debate of "gay marriage", I have yet to hear the argument against gay marriage that does not have religious connotations. Church and State are separate, and we should not be passing legislation in the name of any religion.
Agreed. I think the term marriage should be stripped completely from government.
Leave the "love life" to the individuals please. Fine, block them from benefits if you want- which isn't right either, but don't try and dictate their lives through the beliefs of a few. Remember...Of the people,For the people? ...this doesn't mean just the people you like.
This is not the belief of just a few. It is the majority request of Americans to have it defined as marriage between one man and one woman. We are the voters asking for this law. Congress did not sit down one day and decide to change history. It is the voters who have been pressuring congress to pass a law.
Equality in marriage for homosexuals does not just benefit homosexuals, it benefits the entire society. My wife of twenty some years figured out that she was repressing her true orientation as a lesbian. If she could marry her partner, they both could check the box "married" on their 1040 form, and that would legally end my obligation to pay her spousal support (aka alimony). But NOOOOO. They can't get married, so they cohabitate and live as if they are married, and I still pay alimony. I've been a nice guy and allowed a "legal separation" to linger so she can continue to be on my health insurance, but if she could get married, she'd get better health insurance from her partner, who is a veteran; but instead...I'm still technically "married" and can't get on with my life to remarry my fiance. This situation is preventing me from having a "marriage between a man and a woman"...so I'm cohabitating with her.
Do you see how non-recognition of my 2-b-x's relationship as a marriage is hurting the "marriage between a man and a woman?". I mean, come on! Get off your homophobia and treat everyone equally. It is not marrying your dog, it is not marrying a third person...stop with all of those lame comparisons. Once upon a time we didn't allow marriage between two races. Thomas Jefferson had a common law marriage with a black woman. Get with Canada and other civilized countries and recognize that allowing marriage between two loving human beings, regardless of gender, is the moral and holy right thing to do, even if government really should stay out of the whole thing like others are saying. Unfortunately, the government has that damn 1040 form with it's "filing status" definition. Will you add a box that says "domestic partnership"? I don't think so. So the only solution to my problem is to allow marriage between two adults, regardless of gender.
Add A Comment