View Federal Marriage Amendment on OpenCongress.org

From OpenCongress Wiki

This article is a stub. You can help by expanding it.

Summary (how summaries work)

The Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) was proposed in 2004 by Marilyn Musgrave, a Republican congresswoman from Colorado. This proposed amendment to the Constitution would limit marriage, and the 1000+ federal laws associated with it, to only heterosexual couples. It is known as the "Hate Amendment" to many supporters of gay rights. [1] Unlike the Defense of Marriage Act, the FMA would permanently alter the Constitution, preventing courts from challenging it on constitutional grounds, and would deny states from offering marriage to same-sex couples.

Contents 1 Text of amendment 2 Claims to divine support for amendment 3 Recent amendment attempts 3.1 109th Congress: 2005-2006 4 Articles and Resources 5 See also 5.1 References 5.2 Articles 5.3 Resources

Text of amendment

The most recent House (H.Res.88) and Senate (S.J.Res.1) version of the amendment reads:

"Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman." [2] [3]

Claims to divine support for amendment

Several amendment proponents have stated that it is part of "God's plan" or made similar claims that God supports the amendment, including:

• Rep. John Carter (R-Texas):"It's part of God's plan for the future of mankind."^[1]
• Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.): "It wasn't our idea, it was God's."^[1]
• Rep. Bob Beauprez (R-Colo.): "We best not be messing with His plan."^[1]
• Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.): "I think God has spoken very clearly on this issue."^[1]

Recent amendment attempts

109th Congress: 2005-2006

• Senate, June 7, 2006: A Senate vote on S.J.Res.1 failed to gain the 3/5 majority necessary to gain cloture (end debate) by a vote of 49-48. [4] (THOMAS info page.)

• House, July 18, 2006: The House of Representatives version of the amendment, H.J.Res.88, sponsored by Rep. Musgrave (R-Colo.) (co-sponsors) failed by a vote of 236-187 in favor, effectively ending the debate for the 2006 congressional season. The vote fell 47 votes short of reaching the required 2/3 majority. [5]

Articles and Resources

See also

• Alliance for Marriage, a pro-amendment group.
• American Values Agenda
• Values Action Team
• values voters

References

1. ↑ ^{1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3} "VIDEO: House Conservatives Reveal What God Thinks About Gay Marriage Amendment," ThinkProgress, July 19, 2007.

Articles

• "Recent Developments. Federal Marriage Amendment," Harvard Law School.
• Jordan Lorence, "Wedlock amendment no breach of federalism," Washington Times, June 7, 2006.
• Jim Abrams, "House Rejects Gay Marriage Ban Amendment," Associated Press (1010 WINS), July 18, 2006.
• "U.S. House fails to muster votes to pass marriage amendment measure," Catholic Online, July 18, 2006: "Yet, the Traditional Values Coalition urged members of the House to vote against the measure because the group said it does little for marriage and enshrines in the Constitution the right to homosexual civil unions and domestic partnership. ... 'There is a net loss if this amendment ever becomes law,' said coalition executive director Andrea Lafferty. 'Protection of this sort would kill traditional marriage because it trades civil unions for marriage.' ... She said that the measure not passing 'is a good thing for traditional marriage.'"
• "VIDEO: House Conservatives Reveal What God Thinks About Gay Marriage Amendment," ThinkProgress.org, July 19, 2006.

Resources

• Daily Show segment on the Federal Marriage Amendment, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (delivered by You Tube) (Other Daily Show segments pertaining to Congress)
• http://www.marriagevote.com, a pro-amendment website of the Alliance for Marriage.