% IssueDate = "7/12/04" IssueCategory = "Pen Points" %>
![]()
|
|
|
The U.S. Senate Showdown Over Same-Sex Marriages
|
Perhaps the key event in getting the Senate to take up the issue occurred in late February, when America's "war president" came out of the war-room closet just long enough to endorse a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. This was the imprimatur that GOP leaders and religious right organizations needed to take the gloves off: "The President was right on target when he said activist courts have left the American people no other recourse," said Tony Perkins, the president of the Washington, D.C. lobbying group, the Family Research Council. The American Center for Law and Justice, a right wing legal outfit founded by the Rev. Pat Robertson, issued a statement saying that Bush's endorsement "serves as a critical catalyst to energize and organize those who will work diligently to ensure that marriage remains an institution between one man and one woman." While the decision of the Massachusetts Court, and the photos - circulated world-wide - of thousands lining up outside City Hall in San Francisco to receive marriage licenses may have aggravated some people, that irritation didn't swell into a national call to action as many on the right had predicted. And while polls showed that most Americans opposed gay couples getting hitched, the issue didn't gain much traction, even after the president's endorsement. For most Americans, it appeared that amending the constitution was not an issue to be taken lightly. The mounting casualties in Iraq and the so-called handover of sovereignty, and Michael Moore's award-winning film, Fahrenheit 9/11 have dominated recent headlines, and most Americans still aren't paying much attention to same-sex marriage. The upcoming Senate vote, however, will provide an ideal opportunity for the religious right to turn up the heat on Senators of both parties, as well as activate President Bush's right wing base. As of this writing, sometime during the week of July 12, the Senate will vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA). The Senate vote "is really a discussion about 'cloture' - the process by which the Senate puts a time limit on filibuster, thereby allowing a bill to be voted on," conservative columnist Kathleen Parker recently wrote. If 60 senators vote for cloture, the Federal Marriage Amendment will go to the floor for a full vote. While many observers believe, and a survey by the conservative weekly, Human Events,appeared to confirm, so far there aren't enough votes to pass the amendment. But the scheduling of the vote is also a way of Republican Party leaders playing gotcha with Democrats, forcing them to go on the record in time for the fall campaign. Although the amendment's language has yet to be finalized, its chief Senate sponsor, Sen. Wayne Allard (R.-Col.), has proposed the following: "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." Religious right's plan of attack
In his online newsletter, the Rev. Jerry Falwell urged Christians "to join together in a mass effort to protect traditional marriage." The Rev. said he was "asking all pastors to lift up the God-ordained institution of marriage in their sermons on July 11, and to make clear the serious pitfalls which same-sex 'marriage,' polygamy and other diverse family forms present. In addition, Sunday School teachers are encouraged to discuss marriage from a biblical perspective, and also to discuss the threat of same-sex 'marriage.'" "I want to help rally the troops in the cause to protect traditional marriage from arrogant judges and pompous politicians who seek to circumvent the will of the people in order to enact their ambiguous views on marriage - namely by authorizing same-sex 'marriages,'" the Rev. Falwell wrote. The Rev. Donald Wildmon, the founder and chairman of the American Family Association, is also ratcheting up the rhetoric: In a recent AFA ActionAlert, Wildmon wrote: "The moral fate of our nation is in the hands of those of us - you and me - who believe that marriage is sacred, and should be between one man and one woman only. Our actions now will determine the kind of society our children and grandchildren grow up in later. According to Wildmon the AFA has already collected 1.5 million signatures at its No Gay Marriage website and will be hauling them to Washington on July 12. Pressuring Senators Paul Weyrich, widely acknowledged as the Godfather of the religious right says that there hasn't been enough pressure brought to bear on those Senators that remain uncommitted. According to Weyrich, the head of the Washington, D.C.-based Free Congress Foundation, there has been "too few calls, too few letters and too few faxes are coming into the offices of members of the United States Senate urging them to stand firm in defense of marriage between a man and a woman. That's why too many of the senators who should now be strong supporters of the Federal Marriage Amendment are still in the 'uncommitted' column." Human Events' late-June survey found that 29 Senators had committed to voting for the amendment while 18 indicated they would vote against it. Eight Senators were undecided, and 45 Senators didn't respond to the group's phone calls. (According to CBN.com, no vote on the FMA is scheduled in the House of Representatives "for the foreseeable future.")
"Tolerance is no longer defined as my accepting people for who they are," Gillespie told the Washington Times. "I think when people say, 'Well, no, that's not enough that you accept me for who I am, you have to agree with - and condone - my choice,' that to me is religious bigotry, and I believe that is intolerant. I think they are the ones who are crossing the line here." |