OUTSTANDING speech from Sen. Boxer on FMA

GO BOXER!!!
 
[Partial] STATEMENT OF SENATOR BARBARA BOXER
FEDERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT
July 13, 2004
 
Mr. President, after today, we have 27 legislative days until adjournment – 27 legislative days to deal with the most pressing issues facing this country.
 
We should be passing the Port Security bill and the Rail Security bill, both of which were approved by the Commerce Committee unanimously in April.  We should be passing the Transit Security bill, which was approved by the Banking Committee in May.  We should be passing the Nuclear Plant Security bill, the Chemical Plant Security bill, and the First Responders bill, all of which were approved by the Environment and Public Works Committee last year.  We could be working on those bills to improve our safety instead of worrying about two people of the same gender who have decided to care about each other. 
 
So there you have it.  In the face of all this, what does this Administration want us to do?  A constitutional amendment to prohibit gay marriage – a constitutional amendment that denies millions of Americans equal rights because, even if it does not say so explicitly, it will mean those in domestic partnerships or civil unions will not get equal rights or equal responsibilities.
 
An analysis by David Remes, a partner and legal expert at a well-respected law firm here in Washington, has concluded that this Constitutional amendment will guarantee legal challenges to civil unions and domestic partnerships.  And many have noted, including the American Bar Association, that the language of the Constitutional amendment is so vague that the amendment could be interpreted to ban civil unions and domestic partnerships and the benefits that come with them.
 
This constitutional amendment is divisive to this country.  It is completely unnecessary.  And it enshrines discrimination in the constitution – the constitution – a document meant to expand rights.  We have never amended the Constitution to deny rights and to deny equality.
 
In testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this year, University of Chicago Law School Professor Cass Sunstein noted that all of the amendments to the Constitution are either expansions of individual rights or attempts to remedy problems in the structure of government.  The sole exception was the 18th Amendment that established Prohibition – and that attempt to write social policy into the Constitution was such a disaster that it was repealed less than 15 years later.
 
The list of adopted Constitutional amendments is short – but impressive.  There are the first ten amendments – the Bill of Rights – that guarantee important liberties to the American people from freedom of speech and the press to the right to be secure in our homes to the freedom of religion.
 
There are the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments that undo the terrible injustices of slavery, ensure African-Americans the right to vote, and guarantee everyone the equal protection of the laws.  There is the 19th Amendment that gave women the
right to vote –   the 24th amendment that banned poll taxes to
further ensure minorities the right to vote – and the 26th amendment that gave 18 year olds the right to vote.  Quite an impressive list – a list that seeks to expand freedom and equality. 
 
The Constitution is a gift we have inherited from those giants among men who wrote it 217 years ago.  As written, it was not perfect and we have had to amend the Constitution from time to time.  But, it should never be used to take away rights from decent, loyal Americans.  It should never be used to make a group of Americans permanent second-class citizens.
 
This amendment would make it impossible for states to say to two people who love each other, care for each other, and are willing to die for each other that they have equal inheritance rights, equal hospital visitation rights, equal benefits under the law.  That’s outrageous.
 
My state has a domestic partnership law.  California’s law is, I believe, a start.  It gives same-sex couples many of the same rights and responsibilities as married couples.  It is not perfect, and we need to do more.  But even this imperfect law has meant so much to so many people in California.  And for this Congress to take that away from them by amending the Constitution is wrong and mean spirited.
 
One of my colleagues says that marriage is under assault from gay relationships.  Well I must tell you straight from my heart – not one married couple has ever come up to me and said their marriage was under assault because two people of the same gender down the street care about each other.  If we were truly concerned about strengthening marriages and strengthening families in this country, we would pass an increase in the minimum wage.  We would pass a bill to make sure people had the same health insurance that members of Congress have.  We would pass a bill to make sure that all children have a high quality education.  And instead of freezing the number of kids in after school programs, we would allow them to partake in programs that keep them safe until mom or dad comes home from work.
 
What is really going on here – the real motive here – is crass, cold, hard politics.  This is being done to distract attention from the real issues facing this country.  This constitutional amendment is being used as a weapon of mass distraction.  And this constitutional amendment is being used as a tool for the upcoming political campaigns.  Shame on us.
 
The Constitution should never be used as a political football or as an applause meter before an election.  It truly is a disgrace on the Senate to play politics with the Constitution, and I hope and pray that the American people see this for what it is. 
 
Mr. President, we are all God’s children.  No two of us are alike – we have different color eyes; we have different color hair; we have different color skin; we are different genders; and yes, we have different sexual orientations.  We are all different, and yet we are all united behind the common cause of freedom, justice, and equality.
 
This Constitutional amendment is an attempt to appeal to our prejudice instead of our compassion – our hate instead of our hopes – our fears instead of our dreams.  This Constitutional amendment is an appeal to what is the worst in us instead of an appeal to what is the best in us.
 
In his first Inaugural Address, Abraham Lincoln appealed to “the better angels of our nature.”  This amendment flies in the face of these words.  So regardless of what you think about gay marriage – regardless of whether you are for or against domestic partnerships and civil unions, which I support strongly – regardless of whether you support or oppose the law in your state – this Constitutional amendment should be soundly defeated.
 
I urge my colleagues to do the right thing.  I urge my colleagues to put the Constitution above any possible political gain.  I urge my colleagues to put the Constitution above their own political well-being.  That is the measure of a true patriot.  Voting against this Constitutional amendment is the right thing to do. 
 
And turning our attention to the awesome, challenging and difficult issues facing America’s families is what we must do – for the good of the Senate, for the good of our constituents, for the good of our country.
 
===================================================