POLITICO reports on a proposed amendment to the bi-partisan immigration reform bill so long in the making which could end up killing the bill altogether:
The most serious threat to bipartisan immigration reform doesn't involve border security or guest workers or even the path to citizenship.
It’s about gay rights.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), an outspoken defender of traditional marriage, warned that " if that issue is injected into this bill, the bill will fail and the coalition that helped put it together will fall apart."
Faith groups that have been involved in crafting the legislation are also worried about the negative impacts of this cavalier move which, if viewed unvarnished, is nothing but another attempt to surreptitiously undermine the Defense of Marriage Act:
"We strongly would oppose the provision and it could could force us to reconsider our support for the bill," said Kevin Appleby, director of the Catholic Bishops’ Office of Migration Policy and Public Affairs. "It immediately makes the bill a partisan bill and the bipartisan effort could begin to unravel."
And Alfonso Aguilar, executive director of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles, issued a statement against the proposed amendment saying, in part: "We hope that President Obama and Democrats in Congress are not willing to sacrifice the legalization of millions of undocumented immigrants for the sake of appeasing the gay lobby."
Breitbart News sent the questions below on non-discrimination ordinances to the four Republicans in Congress who have flip-flopped on marriage.
They have yet to receive a response from their offices.
That's because these Republicans are in the process of learning that a) their new position is hugely unpopular with their base and b) betraying marriage isn't the end of the pressure they will receive from far-left activists -- it's only the beginning:
Should business within the wedding/marriage industry be protected from lawsuits resulting from a refusal to service same-sex couples at wedding halls, photography services, catering, etc..?
Should Catholic adoption agencies be forced to include same sex couples when a baby is up for adoption?
Should Christian marriage therapists lose their jobs or licenses b/c they refuse to see same sex couples ?
Should children in public schools be mandated to learn about homosexuality, when the parents do not think it is appropriate to be taught?'
Where does the member stand on the Employment Non-discrimination Act (ENDA)?
In an interview aired over the weekend, Rep. Matt J. Salmon (R-Ariz.) told a local news station that his son’s homosexuality has not led him to change his position on gay marriage.
“I don’t support the gay marriage,” the congressman said. But Salmon emphasized that he loved and respected his son and did not consider homosexuality a choice.
“My son is by far one of the most important people in my life. I love him more than I can say,” an emotional Salmon told 3TV. “It doesn’t mean that I don’t have respect, it doesn’t mean that I don’t sympathize with some of the issues. It just means I haven’t evolved to that stage.”
... “We respect each others’ opinions and we just know that on certain issues we have to agree to disagree,” the congressman’s son, Matt R. Salmon, told The Post. “I love my father and realize that he can have the opinions that he has, and they might differ from mine, but that doesn’t change the way I feel about him.”
... Salmon also expressed disappointment in those who have reacted to the interview by leaving “hate speech” on his father’s Facebook page. “If he’s going to change his mind it’s going to come from a place of love,” Salmon said. “All they’re doing is fighting intolerance with intolerance.”
When asked about the Defense of Marriage Act, Speaker of the House John Boehner said:
"Let's not confused DOMA and the Administration's decision that it was unconstitutional. It's not their role to decide what's constitutional. DOMA was a law passed by the House, the Senate, and signed into law by President Clinton, and in our system of government the administration doesn't get to decide what's constitutional, the Supreme Court does."
Over the weekend, Speaker John Boehner was interviewed about his views on marriage -- he gives a good answer:
House Speaker John Boehner says he's unswayed by a prominent fellow Republican's flip-flop on gay marriage, and that he still opposes the same-sex unions.
Ohio Sen. Rob Portman, a Boehner ally from his home state, revealed Friday that his son is gay and that he now supports gay marriage. Asked about the shift Sunday on ABC's "This Week," Boehner didn't knock his friend, but reiterated his own position.
... "Listen, I believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman," he said. "It's what I grew up with. It's what I believe. It's what my church teaches me. And I can't imagine that position would ever change."
And with debate over the future of the Republican Party breaking into the open at last week's Conservative Political Action Conference, Boehner cast his lot with Republicans who believe better messaging -- not policy changes -- are what's needed for the party.
"The issue with our party is pretty simple," Boehner said. "There's nothing wrong with the principles of our party. But Republicans have not done as an effective job as we should in terms of talking about our principles in terms that average people can appreciate." (New York Daily News)
Ten U.S. senators have filed a friend-of-the-court brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold a law that defines marriage as a union between a man and woman.
The 10, all Republicans, want the high court to overturn the rulings of multiple lower courts that cleared the way for same-sex marriage, McClatchy Newspapers reported.
In their friend-of-the-court brief, the senators said it is inconsistent for the Justice Department to have assured Congress the Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA, was constitutional in the mid-1990s and now raise questions about it.
"The time to speak was in 1996, when Congress gave careful consideration to the need for DOMA," the senators said.
Congress is discussing an act that would protect the religious freedom of members of the military, including chaplains who decide not to perform same-sex ceremonies.
Introduced in the Senate on Sept. 11, 2012, the Military Religious Freedom Act (MRFA) would also prohibit same-sex marriage ceremonies, or anything similar, at military installations.
The House has already passed its version. Military experts are urging people to call their state’s two senators to ask them to co-sponsor the Senate version.
Here is the action item we posted recently related to this bill:
U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe and fellow Republican Roger Wicker of Mississippi introduced a bill Tuesday that would ban same-sex weddings on military bases and allow military chaplains to refuse to officiate such unions.
Current policy is to follow state law on the matter of same-sex marriage.
Inhofe and Wicker said the bill, called the Military Religious Freedom Act, is an attempt to apply the Defense of Marriage Act to the Department of Defense in the wake of a policy change allowing openly gay men and lesbians in the military.
Even by the standards of Capitol Hill, where ambitious and awkward young people are thrust together in cramped workplaces and crowded bars, the nuptial output of Senator Charles E. Schumer’s office stands out.
Schumer staff members, put simply, like to marry each other. There have been 10 weddings so far, and two more scheduled this fall — an average of nearly one “Schumer Marriage” (his term) for each year he has spent in the Senate.
Cupid’s arrow lands where it will, but many of the couples say that Mr. Schumer, a New York Democrat, has an unusual knack for guiding its journey. He keeps close track of office romances, quotes marriage-friendly Scripture (“God to man: be fruitful and multiply”), and is known to cajole, nag, and outright pester his staff (at least those he perceives as receptive to such pestering) toward connubial bliss.
...The encouragement rarely stops at the altar. Mr. Schumer is described by aides as a fabulous wedding guest, quick to request a Jefferson Starship song from the D.J. and eager to dance with the bride. And his focus, like many a politician’s, never strays far from his legacy: first comes Schumer Marriage, then come Schumer Babies.
“Have kids; have a lot of kids,” Mr. Schumer, who has two daughters, is known to intone. “Start early and keep having them.”
Today, Congressman Alan Nunnelee (R-Miss) sent a letter to Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy congratulating him on the dignity with which his company has conducted itself in the face of a vicious smear campaign. The letter is cosigned by 16 of his colleagues in the House of Representatives.
“The criticism they have received has been appalling. Elected officials that are now threatening to block new Chick-fil-A restaurants in their cities are acting in a manner that is un-American. Demanding ideological conformity in order to be allowed to run your business is a dangerous precedent. It is like something that would happen in Soviet Russia. Clearly, a lot of people who like to fashion themselves as open minded and tolerant are actually the most intolerant folks around if you don’t agree with them,” Nunnelee said.
The House has approved an amendment to the 2013 defense spending bill that would prohibit the Department of Defense from using any money in the bill to violate the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
The amendment, from Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), was approved 247-166, one of dozens of amendments the House was considering before approving the entire bill late Thursday night. The amendment was supported by 17 Democrats, and just five Republicans opposed it.
King said the language, similar versions of which have passed the House before, is needed because of President Obama's growing support for same-sex marriage. King said that support is permeating the federal government.
... DOD issued memos last year saying certain military facilities might be used for same-sex marriage, and that military chaplains may officiate in same-sex marriages. King said those policy changes violate DOMA, under which the federal government recognizes marriage as being between a man and a woman.
"Pretty simple statute being contravened by the directives of the president of the United States as exercised through the secretary of Defense," King said.
Damon Root of Reason sees a connection between the way the Supreme Court ruled on Obamacare and how it could rule on DOMA:
"...So let’s assume DOMA will be the first gay rights case to reach the Roberts Court. Is Socarides’ right that the chief justice will again show "a willingness to break with his more conservative colleagues"?
I wouldn’t bet on it—at least not if we take Roberts at his word. Remember that Roberts framed his vote upholding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as an exercise of judicial restraint, writing in his opinion, “It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.” I don't see why Roberts wouldn't rely on that same principle and vote to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act. Both Obamacare and DOMA are duly-enacted federal laws, after all.
If you cheered the chief's ruling on health care, don't be shocked when he grants the same deferential treatment to a federal law you don't like."
Legal scholar Jonathan Adler over at the Volokh Conspiracy legal blog agrees.
The media prefers to focus on lack of unanimity in the Republican party on marriage, but the truth of the matter is that there are pro-marriage Democrats as well:
One third of House Democrats broke with their leaders today and kept their names off a brief urging a federal appeals court to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act, which limits federal recognition of marriages to those between one man and one woman.
The majority of Democrats joined House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's argument, which her office described in a news release as "the Democratic Members' brief," but the break among Democrats offers a glimpse at remaining divisions inside the party.
... Although some Republicans had been asked to join the earlier brief, Pelosi's spokesman, Drew Hammill, told BuzzFeed that none chose to join that filing. Of today's filing, Hammill added, "We had received no indications then or since that any Republican Member were willing to challenge their leadership's decision to expend taxpayer funds on defending DOMA." -- BuzzFeed Politics
House Republicans have signaled they plan to ask the Supreme Court by month's end to get involved in a constitutional fight over same-sex marriage.
In a federal court filing Wednesday in Connecticut, the House of Representatives' Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group asked a judge to put on hold consideration of a pending lawsuit in that state over the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
The 1996 congressional law defines marriage for federal purposes as exclusively between a man and a woman.
... Lawyers for House Republicans, who have now picked up defense of DOMA, said pending court challenges in other jurisdictions should now be put on hold until the justices ultimately decide whether to take up the separate case from Massachusetts.
The first step would be for congressional leaders to formally ask the justices to intervene, by filing a so-called "petition for certiorari."
In their motion this week in the current Connecticut dispute, GOP leaders said they would do that "by the end of the month," predicting it would be a "good candidate for Supreme Court review."
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), an outspoken defender of traditional marriage, warned that " if that issue is injected into this bill, the bill will fail and the coalition that helped put it together will fall apart."
House Speaker John Boehner says he's unswayed by a prominent fellow Republican's flip-flop on gay marriage, and that he still opposes the same-sex unions.
Congress is discussing an act that would protect the religious freedom of members of the military, including chaplains who decide not to perform same-sex ceremonies.
U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe and fellow Republican Roger Wicker of Mississippi introduced a bill Tuesday that would ban same-sex weddings on military bases and allow military chaplains to refuse to officiate such unions.
Schumer staff members, put simply, like to marry each other. There have been 10 weddings so far, and two more scheduled this fall — an average of nearly one “Schumer Marriage” (his term) for each year he has spent in the Senate.
"Voted for a resolution proposing a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as the union between one man and one woman." (
