The Republican Platform: Anti-Same-Sex Marriage and Anti-Civil-Union
Via the New York Times (thanks to Alas reader NancyP for the link). The text in italics indicates a passage that was added at the last minute at the insistence of religious conservatives.
We strongly support President Bush’s call for a Constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage, and we believe that neither federal nor state judges nor bureaucrats should force states to recognize other living arrangements as equivalent to marriage. We believe, and the social science confirms, that the well-being of children is best accomplished in the environment of the home, nurtured by their mother and father anchored by the bonds of marriage. We further believe that legal recognition and the accompanying benefits afforded couples should be preserved for that unique and special union of one man and one woman which has historically been called marriage. After more than two centuries of American jurisprudence, and millennia of human experience, a few judges and local authorities are presuming to change the most fundamental institution of civilization, the union of a man and a woman in marriage. Attempts to redefine marriage in a single state or city could have serious consequences throughout the country, and anything less than a Constitutional amendment, passed by the Congress and ratified by the states, is vulnerable to being overturned by activist judges. On a matter of such importance, the voice of the people must be heard. The Constitutional amendment process guarantees that the final decision will rest with the American people and their elected representatives. President Bush will also vigorously defend the Defense of Marriage Act, which was supported by both parties and passed by 85 votes in the Senate. This common sense law reaffirms the right of states not to recognize same-sex marriages licensed in other states. President Bush said, “We will not stand for judges who undermine democracy by legislating from the bench and try to remake America by court order.” The Republican House of Representatives has responded to this challenge by passing H.R. 3313, a bill to withdraw jurisdiction from the federal courts over the Defense of Marriage Act. We urge Congress to use its Article III power to enact this into law, so that activist federal judges cannot force 49 other states to approve and recognize Massachusetts’ attempt to redefine marriage.
What I find most interesting is this sentence: “We further believe that legal recognition and the accompanying benefits afforded couples should be preserved for that unique and special union of one man and one woman which has historically been called marriage.” This seems to indicate that the Republican platform opposes not only same-sex marriage, but all legal recognitions of same-sex relationships, such as domestic partnerships or civil unions. Yet somehow, I suspect few if any of the “I oppose gay marriage, but favor civil unions” people will say much in opposition to this platform.
UPDATE: The Log Cabin Republicans agree with my interpretation of the GOP platform. Via CultureWatch.
- Andrew Sullivan on the Anti-Marriage Amendment
- New York Mayor to stop same-sex marriage ceremonies and other states of unions in States of the Union
- Same-sex marriage, civil unions, and country-club bigotry
- A Quick Note on Judicial Fiat
- The Stupidest Arguments Against Marriage Equality
This entry posted in Same-Sex Marriage. Bookmark the permalink.