(June 3,2006)
Good morning. Next week, the United States Senate will begin debate on a constitutional amendment that defines marriage in the United States as the union of a man and woman. On Monday, I will meet with a coalition of community leaders, constitutional scholars, family and civic organizations, and religious leaders. They're Republicans, Democrats, and independents who've come together to support this amendment. Today, I want to explain why I support the Marriage Protection Amendment, and why I'm urging Congress to pass it and send it to the states for ratification.
Marriage is the most enduring and important human institution, honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith. Ages of experience have taught us that the commitment of a husband and a wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society. Marriage cannot be cut off from its cultural, religious, and natural roots without weakening this good influence on society. Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all.
In our free society, people have the right to choose how they live their lives. And in a free society, decisions about such a fundamental social institution as marriage should be made by the people -- not by the courts. The American people have spoken clearly on this issue, both through their representatives and at the ballot box. In 1996, Congress approved the Defense of Marriage Act by overwhelming bipartisan majorities in both the House and Senate, and President Clinton signed it into law. And since then, voters in 19 states have approved amendments to their state constitutions that protect the traditional definition of marriage. And today, 45 of the 50 states have either a state constitutional amendment or statute defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. These amendments and laws express a broad consensus in our country for protecting the institution of marriage.
Unfortunately, activist judges and some local officials have made an aggressive attempt to redefine marriage in recent years. Since 2004, state courts in Washington, California, Maryland, and New York have overturned laws protecting marriage in those states. And in Nebraska, a federal judge overturned a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
These court decisions could have an impact on our whole Nation. The Defense of Marriage Act declares that no state is required to accept another state's definition of marriage. If that act is overturned by activist courts, then marriages recognized in one city or state might have to be recognized as marriages everywhere else. That would mean that every state would have to recognize marriages redefined by judges in Massachusetts or local officials in San Francisco, no matter what their own laws or state constitutions say. This national question requires a national solution, and on an issue of such profound importance, that solution should come from the people, not the courts.
An amendment to the Constitution is necessary because activist courts have left our Nation with no other choice. The constitutional amendment that the Senate will consider next week would fully protect marriage from being redefined, while leaving state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage. A constitutional amendment is the most democratic solution to this issue, because it must be approved by two-thirds of the House and Senate and then ratified by three-fourths of the 50 state legislatures.
As this debate goes forward, we must remember that every American deserves to be treated with tolerance, respect, and dignity. All of us have a duty to conduct this discussion with civility and decency toward one another, and all people deserve to have their voices heard. A constitutional amendment will put a decision that is critical to American families and American society in the hands of the American people, which is exactly where it belongs. Democracy, not court orders, should decide the future of marriage in America.
Thank you for listening.
bipartisan : 两党的
overturn :to invalidate or reverse (a decision) by legal means
雅思阅读题型解析-信息品配题
雅思阅读:概述题呈现的新趋势
雅思阅读是非无判断题技巧系列讲解
雅思阅读考试“笔”是最得力的工具
雅思阅读中的加速度
三招搞定雅思阅读
雅思学术类阅读--万能标记法
浅谈雅思阅读中的符号妙用
雅思阅读文章之三大精读要点
词汇量与词汇扩展:阅读与词汇
雅思考试阅读中符号的妙用
雅思阅读考试中常识的运用
Summary completion题型的应对策略
雅思阅读:如何进行“速度”的训练
14招搞定雅思阅读7分
雅思阅读扩展训练
雅思三季度学术类阅读总结及冲刺备考
暑期雅思备考攻略—阅读篇
雅思阅读填空类题型解题技巧
语言递归性与雅思阅读答题技能探析
雅思阅读中的Voynich manuscript
雅思阅读考试:笔是最得力的工具
漫话雅思阅读Summary
构词法核心—雅思阅读必备(下)
如何突破雅思阅读高分“瓶颈”
雅思阅读:如何正确选择中心词
如何储备雅思阅读词汇的妙招
雅思阅读“审题”的重要性
剑7听力真题解析
如何补充基础班学生阅读词汇
不限 |
英语教案 |
英语课件 |
英语试题 |
不限 |
不限 |
上册 |
下册 |
不限 |