5-19-06, 12:58 am
The outcome of the vote earned the ire of numerous civil rights organizations. National Organization for Women (NOW) President Kim Gandy described the amendment as the 'Anti-Marriage Amendment.'
'Shame on George W. Bush and the Republican leadership for supporting a Constitutional amendment to guarantee ongoing discrimination, and making millions of loving couples into fodder for a hate-campaign in November,' Gandy said.
Gandy pledged NOW's opposition to passage of the amendment and said that her organization will continue 'to work toward the day when every person in this country can live and love with pride and dignity.'
Human Rights Campaign (HRC) President Joe Solomonese echoed Gandy's remarks in a press statement released just after the vote on Thursday. 'Today’s vote,' Solomonese said, 'served only to divide Americans, not help us with our collective challenges. As this amendment nears a vote on the Senate floor, it’s critical that fair-minded Americans speak up and speak out against discrimination in the Constitution.'
Solomonese accused the Senate Republicans of holding the vote on short-notice and in a Senate room with reduced public access in order to lessen media attention on the outcome of the vote. Solomonese argued that the anti-marriage amendment is being used as a political tool to appeal to ultra-right voters. He pointed out that widespread opposition to the amendment caused it to fail in 2004 in both Republican-controlled houses of Congress.
Recent polling data provided by Peter D. Hart Associates shows that passage of the FMA ranks last among voters' priorities. A majority of voters disapprove of amending the Constitution on the question of marriage and civil unions and prefer that Congress spend its time providing affordable health care, addressing the war in Iraq, and ending corruption in Congress.
Eleanor D. Acheson, director of Public Policy and Government Affairs at the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF), accused the Republicans of playing political games with the marriage issue. 'Once again,' she said, 'lesbian and gay families are being used as political pawns, and the political opportunism of those pushing for the Federal Marriage Amendment is nakedly transparent. '
Acheson remarked that the course of US history has been toward more equality with an expansion of civil rights. The FMA, she noted, would reverse that trend. 'It would weaken our First Amendment religious liberty values by enshrining one egregiously intolerant religious view of marriage, and it would undermine our federalist system,' Acheson added.
In a letter to the Senate committee, Wade Henderson, executive director of LCCR, said, 'LCCR strongly believes that there are right and wrong ways to address the issue of same-sex marriage as a matter of public policy, and is extremely concerned about any proposal that would alter our nation's most important document for the direct purpose of excluding any individuals from its guarantees of equal protection.'
Gabriela Lemus, director of policy and legislation for the League of United Latin American Citizens, suggested that FMA posed a grave threat to all civil rights legislation and minority groups. While gays and lesbians are the target of this measure, 'Who's next?' she wondered.
Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, remarked during the committee debate, 'A vote for this amendment is a vote for bigotry – pure and simple.' All ten Republicans on the committee promptly voted for the amendment.
--Joel Wendland is managing editor of Political Affairs and may be reached at
