Rep. Boozman Opposes same-Sex Marriage

HEADLINE: REP. BOOZMAN OPPOSES SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

BYLINE: States News Service

DATELINE: WASHINGTON

BODY:

The office of Rep. John Boozman, R-Ark., issued the following press release: Rep. Boozman's Column for the Week of March 8, 2004

Webster's Dictionary calls marriage, "the legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife." This definition has been the foundation of every human society for centuries. Marriage is uniquely protected in the law and culture. It predates the Constitution and is the most stable and effective framework for the welfare of our children and of our society. I strongly believe in that union.

Activist judges and local officials are aggressively attempting to redefine marriage. The Massachusetts State Supreme Court indicated they will order the issuance of marriage licenses to applicants of the same gender this May, circumventing the citizens' right to vote on such an important issue. In San Francisco, the mayor has already issued thousands of marriage licenses to same-sex couples, in direct violation of California law. He continues to perform these ceremonies baltantly flaunting a state law which clearly defines marriage as only between a man and a woman. And in the small Hudson Valley village of New Paltz, New York, Mayor Jason West took it upon himself to perform marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples. He has since been charged with nineteen violations of New York's domestic relations law.

It has become increasingly clear that our courts are undermining what the voters consider to be the proper definition of marriage. The American people have a right to weigh in on this issue, but that power is being taken away from them.

The current trend of this country shows that most Americans do not believe in same-sex marriages. Even civil unions lack the support of a majority of the country. Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) has introduced the H.J. Res. 56, the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would amend the United States Constitution to protect the traditional definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman. I have cosponsored this amendment because will keep prohibit judges, local officials and the courts from forcing their own agendas on the American people.

I certainly recognize the concerns of those individuals who are opposed to amending our Constitution. The Constitution is an enumeration of our God-given rights and responsibilities, and should only be amended as a last resort to certain issues.

Unfortunately, these recent events show that we may be forced to turn to that last resort. President George W. Bush, who is himself a strong defender of the Constitution, agrees that protecting this institution is worthy of such a monumental step. He said it is a sensitive issue, and as such, the voice of the people needed to be heard. I agree with his belief that the constitutional process is the best way to ensure that the people ultimately have the choice in this matter, not the courts.

The traditional definition of marriage should not be changed unilaterally. A vast majority of Americans, including most residents of the Third District of Arkansas, do not support granting same-sex couples marital status. Their views deserve to be heard before any changes are made to the definition of marriage.