Factbites
 Where results make sense
About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   PR   |   Contact us  

Topic: Federal Marriage Amendment


Related Topics

In the News (Tue 23 Apr 19)

  
  Wikinfo | Federal Marriage Amendment   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
The Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) is a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that would assert a federal definition of marriage as a heterosexual union of a man and a woman.
FMA is intended to provide a constitutional reaffirmation of opposite-sex marriage, and supporters hope that passage of the amendment will absolve communities and corporations from any obligation to accord marital rights to same-sex or unmarried opposite-sex unions.
A cloture motion to force a direct vote on the FMA was defeated in the Senate on July 14, 2004 by a wider-than-expected margin of 50 nay votes to 48 yea votes.
www.wikinfo.org /wiki.php?title=Federal_Marriage_Amendment   (1562 words)

  
 On the Federal marriage amendment
There is the 19th Amendment that gave women the right to vote the 24th amendment that banned poll taxes to further ensure minorities the right to vote and the 26th amendment that gave 18 year olds the right to vote.
This Constitutional amendment is so flawed and so mean spirited, it never made it out of Committee, it does not have the necessary 67 votes to pass the Senate, and it may not even have a majority of the Senate in favor of it.
This amendment would make it impossible for states to say to two people who love each other, care for each other, and are willing to die for each other that they have equal inheritance rights, equal hospital visitation rights, equal benefits under the law.
buffaloreport.com /2004/040713.boxer.marriage.html   (2418 words)

  
 Equal Marriage NOW: Talking Points
NOW made its support for same-sex marriage official in 1995, declaring that the choice of marriage is a fundamental constitutional right under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment that should not be denied because of a person's sexual orientation.
The anti-gay amendments to the U.S. Constitution and the state constitutions are intended to define marriage as the ";union between a man and a woman"; and designed to deny same-sex couples ANY legal protections.
Civil marriage for gays and lesbians affirms the importance of the institution of marriage.
www.now.org /issues/marriage/points.html   (2324 words)

  
 CNN.com - Senate set to reject gay marriage ban - Jun 6, 2006
Nonetheless, proponents are defending the decision by Republican leaders to bring the amendment to the Senate floor, dismissing complaints from opponents that the measure is a pernicious election-year ploy that has wasted precious time on the legislative calendar.
However, even some opponents of same-sex marriage are wary of the federal amendment, which they see as an unwarranted intrusion into an area traditionally left up to states.
To become part of the Constitution an amendment needs approval from at least two-thirds of the Senate (67 of the 100 members), at least two-thirds of the House (290 of the 435 members) and three-fourths of the states (38 of the 50 states), or by a convention called by three-fourths of the states.
www.cnn.com /2006/POLITICS/06/06/same.sex.marriage/index.html   (958 words)

  
 Federal Marriage Amendment   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
If the FMA were passed and ratified, it would be the first time the Constitution was amended to restrict – rather than to expand – rights (excepting Prohibition, which was subsequently repealed).
Supporters of the FMA argue that it is needed because the courts have gone too far in interpreting the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting what they call “gay rights.” However, this argument sets a dangerous precedent if the Constitution is amended every time there is discontent over judicial decisions.
Supporters of the FMA also argue that such an amendment, voted on by the representative bodies across the country, is the only fair way to gauge public opinion on the issue of gay marriage and that the people should have the right to decide whether or not rights should be extended to gays and lesbians.
www.aauw.org /issue_advocacy/actionpages/positionpapers/fma.cfm   (717 words)

  
 Federal Marriage Amendment Petition
A Federal Marriage Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is desperately needed.
Passing an amendment in Congress requires a two-thirds majority vote in the House and in the Senate, and then ratification by three-fourths of the states.
The Amendment was introduced in the Senate on November 25, 2003, with four initial co-sponsors.
www.lc.org /Petitions/fedmarriage/fma_070103.htm   (639 words)

  
 FMA Support   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
If passed, it would be a permanent amendment to the United States Constitution, defining marriage in the Constitution as only between a man and a woman.
For a Constitutional amendment, such as the FMA, to pass, it would not only have to be approved by Congress, but it would also have to be ratified by three-fourths of the states.
In 1996 the Federal "Defense of Marriage Act" (DOMA) was passed, defining marriage as being between one man and one woman in the eyes of the Federal government.
rejoiceministries.org /fma.html   (467 words)

  
 Reformulate the Federal Marriage Amendment by Charles E. Rice
Congress, in the Defense of Marriage Act, defined marriage as a man-woman union for purposes of federal law and attempted to excuse states from recognizing a same-sex "marriage" contracted in another state.
The second sentence of FMA would bar courts from claiming that any constitution or law requires them to mandate that "marital status or the legal incidents thereof" be conferred on a same-sex couple.
The FMA is unclear as to its objective and effect.
www.humanevents.com /article.php?id=1724   (807 words)

  
 CNN.com - Bush calls for ban on same-sex marriages - Feb. 25, 2004
The president said he decided to endorse an amendment because of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's recent decision granting marriage rights to same-sex couples, and San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom's decision two weeks ago to begin giving marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples.
Bush also said state legislatures should be left to define "legal arrangements other than marriage," suggesting that such an amendment would allow states to establish civil unions for same-sex couples.
The Defense of Marriage Act, signed by President Clinton, prevents federal recognition of same-sex marriage, and allows states to ignore same-sex licenses from outside their borders.
us.cnn.com /2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/24/elec04.prez.bush.marriage   (1158 words)

  
 Why We Need a Marriage Amendment by Robert P. George, David L. Tubbs, City Journal Autumn 2004
The federalism proposed by the liberal opponents of a constitutional amendment is in fact a sham.
After all, the idea of same-sex marriage would have seemed outlandish only a few years ago, and today only a minority, led by an elite of academics, journalists, entertainers, and, of course, state and federal judges and their clerks, gives the idea any credence.
The vast majority of Americans holds as self-evident the truth that marriage between a man and a woman is a fundamental institution of a free and democratic society.
www.city-journal.org /html/14_4_marriage_amendment.html   (1630 words)

  
 The Federal Marriage Amendment
Let the national government be entrusted with the defense of the nation, and its foreign and federal relations; the State governments with the civil rights, law, police, and administration of what concerns the State generally; the counties with the local concerns of the counties, and each ward direct the interests within itself.
Forget about a Federal Marriage Amendment and relieve family stress by demolishing the Sixteenth Amendment which was never legally ratified to begin with.
I am unwilling either to cede to federal courts the authority to redefine marriage, or to deny a state’s ability to preserve the traditional definition of marriage.
www.spingola.com /federal_marriage_amendment.htm   (2371 words)

  
 FindLaw's Writ - Barr: The Federal Marriage Amendment
FindLaw's Writ - Barr: The Federal Marriage Amendment
The whole FMA debate arose because of a foolish and authoritarian decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court - a decision that wrongfully imposed same-sex marriages on an unwilling state.
But the FMA, in seeking to impose a federal definition of marriage on the states is fundamentally at odds with the true conservative principle of limited, federalist government.
writ.news.findlaw.com /commentary/20040716_barr.html   (1296 words)

  
 Centerfield: Federal Marriage Amendment developments
Beyond the inartful use of the first section, which would make this constitutional amendment the first amendment to have a short title, the second section raises serious federalism concerns because it mandates a construction of state constitutions, which would be binding by way of the Supremacy Clause on state judges as well as federal judges.
I believe that marriage falls within the traditional scope of the states' police power and is not a proper subject for federal legislation, except for federal purposes (e.g., federal income taxation).
Marriage in the United States, and in each of the several States, shall be defined as the legislature thereof shall provide, except that no State, nor the United States, shall restrict marriage on the basis of race.
www.centristcoalition.com /blog/archives/002049.html   (2461 words)

  
 People For the American Way - Marriage Discrimination Amendment
Currently, a proposed constitutional amendment to limit marriage to unions between one man and one woman threatens to prevent same-sex couples from ever gaining equal access to the institution of marriage.
This time around, the amendment’s proponents are calling their legislation a “Marriage Protection Amendment,” but a more apt title would be the Marriage Discrimination Amendment.
In practice, this Marriage Discrimination Amendment would prevent any state from extending equal marriage rights to same-sex couples and would jeopardize domestic partner and civil union laws that provide some measure of protection to same-sex couples and their families.
www.pfaw.org /pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=13749   (497 words)

  
 Out In The Mountains : News - Federal Marriage Amendment Dies
Six Republicans voted against the FMA cloture motion, resulting in a dead end for the amendment: both of Maine's Senators, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, New Hampshire's John Sununu, Rhode Island's John Chafee, Colorado's Ben Campbell, and Arizona's John McCain.
Leahy, speaking at a press conference after the vote, said that the Republicans' "handling of this constitutional amendment has boiled down to pure politics, at the expense of gay and lesbian Americans and the families and friends and coworkers who care about them." Further, he said, "We showed why a constitutional amendment is unnecessary.
It presupposes that constitutional challenges to the federal DOMA law, enacted in 1996 during the Democratic Clinton Administration, might threaten to impose a nationwide interpretation of a single state's marriage laws.
www.mountainpridemedia.org /oitm/issues/2004/08aug2004/news01_fma.htm   (705 words)

  
 scot hacker’s foobar blog » Federal Marriage Amendment
Against all common sense and human dignity, Congress is once again considering the discriminatory and barbaric Federal Marriage Amendment.
Legislation has already been passed in Australia specifically defining marriage as “between a man and a woman”; at the Federal level, although the ACT (Australian Capital Territory) has recently enacted legislation allowing civil union and is set for a showdown with the Feds.
Marriage should simply be a matter of contract law independent of religion or sex in the eyes of the government.
birdhouse.org /blog/2006/05/15/federal-marriage-amendment   (561 words)

  
 Marriage amendment picks up four Senate votes over ’04   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
A majority of the Senate this year will support the Federal Marriage Amendment, an outcome that both the left and the right say will energize their respective bases in November.
In the summer of 2004, the effort to define marriage as between a man and a woman failed in the Senate, on a 48-50 vote.
Wolfson called the amendment a ploy for short-term political gain; he said Republicans would use the amendment as a distraction and an attack point in some races this fall.
www.hillnews.com /thehill/export/TheHill/News/Campaign/041206.html   (749 words)

  
 WorldNetDaily: Federal Marriage Amendment dead?
Fearing the Federal Marriage Amendment defining the institution as between one man and one woman may die in committee, traditional-values activists are urging their constituents to contact their members of Congress and U.S. senators and urge them to act on the proposal.
After homosexual "marriage" was given legal legitimacy in jurisdictions across the nation this year, President Bush signaled his support for amending the U.S. Constitution.
Constitutional amendments must be OK'd by two-thirds of the House of Representatives, two-thirds of the Senate and obtain ratification by three-quarters of the states.
www.worldnetdaily.com /news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38118   (517 words)

  
 Federal Marriage Amendment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The 1862 Morrill Act Of The Bears, which made bigamy a punishable federal offense, was followed by series of federal laws designed to end the practice of polygamy.
The amendment was written by the Alliance for Marriage, an organization founded by Matt Daniels, with the assistance of Judge Robert Bork, Professor Robert P. George of Princeton University, Professor Gerard V. Bradley of Notre Dame Law School and other conservatives.
Marriage is a secular procedure, while any religious observation is ceremonial, as people of no religious faith may and do indeed marry.
en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Gay_marriage_amendment   (4894 words)

  
 NoGayMarriage.com -- Help Save Marriage! Sign the Marriage Protection Amendment petition
Activist liberal judges are intent on destroying the institution of marriage as being between one man and one woman.
There are cases in several courts across the country in which the pro-homosexual marriage proponents are attempting to get an activist judge to legalize homosexual marriage.
We need the Marriage Protection Amendment, which defines marriage as being only between one man and one woman, in our Constitution to keep activist judges from forcing their view of marriage on every American.
www.nogaymarriage.com   (484 words)

  
 Gay Democrats: Federal Marriage Amendment
Never once has their been an amendment to the Constitution designed to take away the rights of a specific group of people; but if Republicans have their way, that will change.
A vote is expected in late June or July on an amendment that would roll back the clock on equality for gay and lesbian Americans.
This law would not just ban marriage equality for same sex couples, but experts believe this amendment could also invalidate domestic partner and civil union laws.
outfordemocracy.org /arch/000492.html   (483 words)

  
 MARRIAGE DIGEST: Amendment introduced in U.S. Senate - (BP)   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
Wayne Allard, R.-Colo., introduced the amendment on the Senate floor exactly one week after the highest court in Massachusetts legalized same-sex "marriage" in that state.
However, there is no federal law banning states from legalizing same-sex "marriage." The Defense of Marriage simply says the federal government will not recognize such "marriages" legalized in states.
Although Minnesota has a defense of marriage act in law, a constitutional amendment is considered an even stronger protection against a state court ruling.
www.bpnews.net /bpnews.asp?ID=17178   (958 words)

  
 Americans United: Marriage & Family Life
The government must also recognize that while many couples choose to be married in a house of worship, marriage itself is ultimately a civil institution; access to it should not be defined or limited because of religious strictures.
The purpose of the drive is ostensibly to bar the federal and state governments from recognizing marriages between gay couples, although the amendment also would eradicate hundreds of legal rights that gay and lesbian families currently enjoy under a number of state and local laws.
Americans United believes that the campaign to place a marriage amendment in the Constitution raises important church-state and religious liberty concerns.
www.au.org /site/PageServer?pagename=issues_marriage   (272 words)

  
 Federal Marriage Amendment   (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-03)
There is growing support for a Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) in which a marriage would be defined as only between a man and a woman.
As cases involving the legalization of homosexual marriage crop up on the state level, proponents of the FMA are hoping to curb this trend by going straight to the Constitution, which would permanently end the assaults on marriage.
If passed, the amendment would "restrict the definition of marriage to a union between one man and one woman, and prohibit state or federal courts from forcing legislatures to award the benefits of marriage to unmarried homosexual couples," according to an April article by Focus on the Family's Citizen magazine.
www.sbclife.org /Articles/2003/06/sla5.asp   (600 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)

Factbites
  About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   Press   |   Contact us  
Copyright © 2005-2007 www.factbites.com Usage implies agreement with terms.