House Prepares to Vote on Marriage Protection Act

by Bill Fancher, Allie Martin, and Jenni Parker
July 21, 2004

(AgapePress) - The fight to protect traditional marriage, defined exclusively as a union between one man and one woman, now shifts to the U.S. House of Representatives.

House Majority Whip Roy Blunt of Missouri says the defenders of traditional marriage have their strategy all lined out. He says one of the first critical votes will involve making sure that the law previously passed to protect marriage -- the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA -- "can't be tampered with by the courts." On Thursday (July 22) the House is scheduled to vote on the bill that Blunt hopes will help resolve the issue, a bill authored by Congressman John Hostettler of Indiana called "The Marriage Protection Act" (MPA).

The federal DOMA, passed by Congress and signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1996, gave states the option to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. However, that law is being subjected to numerous legal challenges in courts around the U.S., especially since the ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court that made same-sex marriage legal in that state. The issue addressed by the MPA (H.R. 3313) is whether Congress can and should use its constitutional power to stop federal courts from hearing cases challenging the right of states that rejects same-sex marriage to recognize the same-sex marriages of a state that recognizes such unions.

"And so we'll be bringing John Hostettler's bill to the floor," Blunt says, explaining that the proposed legislation would not allow the federal courts "to deal with the section of [the federal DOMA] that says the states don't have to recognize things simply because they've happened in other states."

The Missouri Republican believes the MPA, while not a perfect solution, would at least give states that want to protect marriage a chance to do so. "It's not the ultimate protection," he says. "I think we've seen that the states are not able to control the issue. It's the county clerk here, the mayor there, that can on their own can create lots of havoc. But in terms of defending the states who want to defend themselves, this is another step taken to be sure that we continue to allow those states to defend traditional marriage."

Blunt notes that stronger support for the protection of marriage can be found in the House of Representatives than in the Senate. After a spirited debate on the measure in the House Judiciary Committee, on July 14 the MPA passed by a vote of 21-13. As it goes before the full House this week, supporters are hoping Congress will approve the bill with an equally decisive vote.

Randy Thomasson

Grassroots Mobilization Efforts Continue
As the House prepares to vote on H.R. 3313, pro-family leaders are working to muster support for the measure. Randy Thomasson, executive director of Campaign for California Families, is asking citizens who support traditional marriage to call their own members of Congress and other key legislative representatives, urging the lawmakers to vote yes on the MPA.

Thomasson says the MPA is needed in order to "prohibit federal judges, even the Supreme Court, from exporting homosexual 'marriage' from one state to another." He says the effort to protect traditional marriage can succeed if everyone does his or her part and "God blesses our obedience."

Pastor Bill Owens also adds his voice to the call for commitment in the battle to defend marriage. The founder of the Coalition of African American Pastors, who participated in the marches and activism of the civil rights era, calls the fight to defend traditional marriage the most crucial moral and political battle ever faced by the United States.

"We've got to fight," Owens says, "however tough it gets. Since I was a part of the civil rights movement, I remember so well when people risked their lives, they risked their freedom, they risked their health, and they were willing to because they believed so strongly. It was in our bones, that, 'We've got to make this happen for our kids.' And I take that same position here -- our children deserve better."

Owens says not only will the battle ahead require this kind of courage and commitment, but it will also be crucial for churches to cross racial lines and stand in unity with other Christians in support of the biblical view of marriage.

Gary Bauer

Bauer Sees No Need to Be Discouraged
Meanwhile, Gary Bauer of the Campaign for Working Families has been monitoring the ongoing legislative fight over the definition of marriage as well as the reactions of the pro-homosexual marriage movement. Since the unsuccessful Senate cloture vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) on July 14, he notes that many opponents of the amendment are recognizing the vote as a qualified victory, at best.

Although the pro-FMA senators' failure to break a Democrat filibuster and force a vote on the constitutional amendment may have seemed a setback to some, Bauer points out that the effort was far from wasted. He cites editorial comments in a recent issue of the homosexual newspaper, the Washington Blade, as evidence. He quotes Blade editor Chris Crain, who pointed out that many of the very same Senate Democrats who opposed the FMA effort so vehemently also spoke favorably of the DOMA and went on record to say they also believed marriage should be limited to the union of a man and a woman.

Crain's article went on to note that in four out of five recent Senate races, Democrats had neutralized the FMA issue by promising to support the amendment. While the Democrats had won the first round, the editor asked, "What about Round 2? If 'pro-gay' senators won't defend our equality when they have the votes in the bag, what can we expect when their arguments about the Defense of Marriage Act don't work anymore?"

Bauer says the pro-traditional marriage crowd should be encouraged and should keep fighting, despite what may appear to be setbacks. "Even our opponents realize that, while we may have lost the vote last week, we are winning the debate!" he says.