WASHINGTON — Sounding like a groom vowing to wed his fiancee only after he dates some more, Senate Judiciary Chairman Orrin Hatch said Tuesday he supports a newly rewritten constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.

But he is still considering alternative approaches.

Hatch, R-Utah, who was home recuperating from back surgery, sent his written statement to the third in a series of hearings before his committee on an amendment to ban gay marriages.

Hatch supported revisions announced Monday by Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman, but to allow civil unions to give gays some limited rights on issues from insurance to survivor benefits.

"I wholeheartedly support the passage of the Allard amendment," Hatch wrote. But he added, "There may be other approaches that warrant our consideration.'

A constitutional amendment is enacted if it passes by two-thirds majorities in both houses of Congress, and is then ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states.

Hatch spokeswoman Margarita Tapia said the senator is looking at simple statute alternatives to a constitutional amendment. She said he also is considering a different amendment that could leave the definition of marriage to the states and prohibit federal courts from interfering.

That would address a main attack by liberals on Allard's amendment. They say it would infringe on power traditionally given to states to regulate marriage and family law.

Conservatives counter that polls show vast majorities support traditional marriage, but say "activist judges" are going against such views by declaring gay marriage a new civil right. President Bush has said the only way to overcome that is with a constitutional amendment, which he has urged Congress to pass.

Allard said that with courts or local officials allowing gay marriage, at least temporarily, in California, Oregon, New York and New Mexico, it is time "to defend marriage from the onslaught of judicial activism and return the power on these matters to the states themselves."

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., who is gay, argued Tuesday at the hearing that allowing gay marriage "is not abolishing traditional marriage, but extending it to people who are not now eligible."

He said fellow gays "because of who we are, the way we were born, are not attracted to the opposite sex." He said if they choose to enter into long-term, loving relationships with other gays, that should not threaten those in heterosexual marriages. "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery," he said.