(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(推翻;否决)
(来源:http://www.weeklyradioaddress.com/
英语点津姗姗编辑)