[News-releases] NOW Blasts Introduction of Federal Anti-MarriageAmendment

NOW Press Office
202-628-8669 Rebecca Farmer, x 116
202-785-8576 (fax) 
                                        
NOW Blasts Introduction of Federal Anti-Marriage Amendment

November 26, 2003

"The so-called Federal Marriage Amendment is a transparent election-year ploy
to gain political profit by exploiting bigotry and hate. The Constitution
should be amended to extend rights to everyone and guarantee equal treatment,
and should not be marred by institutionalizing discrimination," said National
Organization for Women (NOW) President Kim Gandy. "This bill even has the
potential to undermine the protections and rights currently granted by civil
unions, which became legal in Vermont in 2000. NOW activists and other
supporters across the country are already contacting their senators demanding
they vote this down."           

Senator Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) introduced the legislation, Senate Joint
Resolution 26, which is currently cosponsored by Senators Jeff Sessions
(R-Ala.), Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) and James Inhofe
(R-Okla).

"After introducing the bill, Senator Allard opined, 'This union is sacred and
must remain so.' Sounds like he's confused about the difference between civil
marriage and its religious counterpart.  Or perhaps he's forgotten about
separation of church and state," Gandy said. "Civil marriage is a legal right,
not an ideological playground. It's not about what you believe or don't
believe--this is about what is fair and just. Heterosexual couples don't
have a
monopoly on love, and shouldn't have a monopoly on marriage. My marriage won't
be threatened or undermined by making civil marriage rights available to
same-sex couples, and neither will anyone else's."

Heterosexual married couples are afforded more than a thousand legal
protections and benefits in state and federal law which are inaccessible to
committed same-sex couples. Benefits of civil marriage include access to
health
care and medical decision making for your partner and your children; parenting
rights; Social Security; taxation, inheritance and other government benefits;
as well as the simple ability to pool resources to buy or transfer property
without adverse tax treatment. 

"Our Constitution is about expanding and defining rights and liberties, not
limiting them," Gandy said. "Lawmakers who support a sweeping federal mandate
to keep same-sex couples from the legal rights inherent in civil marriage are
pandering to prejudice. This stems from the same narrow-minded and bigoted
perspective that fueled miscegenation laws. In the 1960's, the civil rights
movement fought for interracial couples have marriage rights--and won. We're
fighting for marriage rights again, this time for same-sex couples. We'll win
this struggle too."

###