The chief sponsors of a federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage clarified their proposal so that it would allow state legislatures to grant civil unions and domestic-partner benefits, a rewording designed to win more support in Congress.
On the eve of a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the legislation, opponents called the announcement by two Colorado Republicans — Senator Wayne Allard and Representative Marilyn Musgrave — a political concession that does not change the substance of the amendment, which would codify marriage as the union of a man and a woman and prevent courts from ruling that same-sex marriages are required under any state constitution.
The principal change deletes a phrase that could have been interpreted as banning any state law from allowing same-sex couples to receive civil partnership rights. The revised version of the amendment does not explicitly say states could approve civil unions or partner benefits, but omitting the ban would allow legislatures to do so.
The proposed amendment — the only one introduced in Congress — has become a hot political issue since the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling on gay marriage in November and the issuing of marriage licenses to same-sex couples in San Francisco and other jurisdictions.
Last month, President Bush announced his support for amending the Constitution to ban same-sex marriage, but did not endorse the Allard-Musgrave proposal. However, Bush has recently suggested that states should have the right to consider civil unions, which only Vermont has authorized. A recent Washington Post-ABC News poll indicates that a slim majority of Americans surveyed support civil unions for gay and lesbian couples and that a slightly larger majority oppose amending the Constitution.
The Massachusetts Legislature is poised to vote on an amendment to the state constitution that would ban same-sex marriage. Legislators are meeting in another constitutional convention to debate the proposed amendments.
In California, the State Supreme Court issued a ruling that halted the flood of marriage licenses being issued to same-sex couples in San Francisco. The high court said it will decide whether Mayor Newsom had the authority to defy the state law which defines marriage as only between a man and a woman. Governor Schwarzenegger said he would be fine if voters changed the state’s family code to allow same-sex marriages.
And in Canada, Quebec became the third province to allow same-sex marriage after its high court ruled that the traditional definition of marriage is discriminatory and unjustified