The Senate is meeting Thursday in Washington to discuss whether the current U.S. laws regarding same-sex marriages are enough to legally prohibit same-sex marriages, and if not, discuss possible amendments.
President Clinton signed a law in 1996 that excludes same-sex couples from the basic protections, rights and responsibilities of marriage, according to the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.
According to the Human Rights Campaign, the proposed Constitutional amendment states, "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman."
Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo., and five co-sponsors introduced the amendment on May 21, 2003.
When I reflect on the times when the Constitution was amended, the word "discrimination" does not come to mind.
Amendments were made to address equality for all, not discrimination of some.
The abolishment of slavery and granting women the right to vote are two wonderful examples of the United States' steps in the right direction. By considering prohibiting same-sex partners from marrying, we are walking a million steps back in time.
Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb, opposes a federal marriage amendment, according to the Omaha World-Herald.
"I don't think the Constitution was ever written and set up for those kinds of amendments," Hagel said. "I think those kinds of issues are better left to the states."
Currently, no state in the United States legally marries same-sex couples. Vermont gives its same-sex couples all the same legal opportunities as a legal marriage through a civil union, but it is not recognized as a marriage.
But what does the leader of our country have to say about it?
"I think it's very important for our society to respect each individual, to welcome those with good hearts, to be a welcoming country," President George W. Bush said at a Rose Garden Press Conference in May. "On the other hand that does not mean that somebody like me needs to compromise on the issue such as marriage. And that's really where the issue is headed here in Washington, and that is the definition of marriage. I believe in the sanctity of marriage. I believe a marriage is between a man and a woman. And I think we ought to codify that one way or the other and we've got lawyers looking at the best way to do that."
Translation: Let me find some people to speak fancy legal jargon that will make same-sex marriages sound unconstitutional.
How can Bush stress the importance of respecting individuals when he's placing conditions on certain sexualities?
Take a minute to reflect on what a marriage is truly defined as. Sure, I can imagine Prince Charming sweeping me off my feet into the wondrous world of love and happiness, but there's more to it than all that good mushy stuff.
There are many legal issues that rest behind the legal union of two people.
Medical decisions, inheritance protections, hospital visitations, court fees, Worker's Compensation and Medicare are only a few examples of the benefits to those who decide to take the plunge.
So why limit this right to only the heterosexual community?
Some disagree with the idea of same-sex marriages.
"At CFI(Culture and Family Institute), we are extending a hand to people struggling with homosexuality, while putting a hand up to halt the radical homosexual agenda," Robert H. Knight, director of the Culture and Family Institute said in an Interview with Family Voice.
Perhaps Mr. Knight needs help struggling with the idea that we live in a world where not everyone is the same.
Remember: It's up to you. < I>The Daily News< I> prints the phone numbers of the Senators at the bottom of the page for more than just filler. They are there for you to call and make your opinions known.
Write to Melissa at mjskopelja@bsu.edu
Read More
Three Air Jam teams take home the win
October 12, 2012Nineteen teams shimmied, shook and flipped for a sold out John R. Emens Auditorium on Thursday night during the 25th annual Air Jam.
Bill Clinton Speaks at North Central High School
October 12, 2012Former President's Speech Could Have Effect on State Senate Race
