A proposal to amend the U.S. Constitution to define the legal status of marriage exclusively as a union between a man and a woman was met with both strong support and vehement opposition by religious groups May 15.
The proposed constitutional amendment, which was introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Ronnie Shows, D-Miss., would ban same-sex civil marriages and would leave it up to state legislatures to determine what kind of rights same-sex couples should receive.
While same-sex couples would be able to unite in religious marriage ceremonies, the amendment would prohibit them from being legally recognized as a married couple, said Matt Daniels, executive director for the Alliance for Marriage, a group of religious leaders and activists who advocate the benefits of heterosexual marriage.
Daniels said the legislation was in response to “the weakening legal status of marriage in America at the hands of the courts,” noting the Vermont Supreme Court ruling that recognized same-sex marriages.
But the Interfaith Working Group, one of many religious groups that supports equal civil marriage rights for same-gender couples, said the proposal “would give the civil institution of marriage a religious definition that is not shared by all religions.”
In a statement released by the Unitarian Universalist Association, William Sinkford, president of the organization, said, “Loving relationships between adults are a blessing, and these couples (same-sex) should have the freedom to marry if they so wish.”
Daniels, at an Alliance for Marriage news conference announcing the amendment, argued that “gays and lesbians have a right to live as they choose. But they don’t have a right to redefine marriage for our entire society.”
To become law, the amendment would have to win two-thirds majorities of both houses of Congress and be ratified by three-fourths of state legislatures.
(RNS)
Share with others: