Nuptial vote is short in Senate

But Democratic leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., charged that GOP leaders went to the procedural vote as a smokescreen to cover anemic support among their members for the amendment. He said they could attract more support for the procedural vote than for the amendment itself and thus avoided an even more embarrassing loss.

Also, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, charged Republicans "scheduled this debate to maximize crass (election-year) political considerations. Their handling of this constitutional amendment has boiled down to pure politics at the expense of gay and lesbian Americans."

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said in debate, "We did not choose the schedule for this issue. It was chosen for us" because of a ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Court that legalized same-sex marriage there and because some cities elsewhere also allowed it pending court challenges.

"Those (gay) couples have spread to 46 states. Folks, marriage has already been amended," Hatch told the Senate.

Bennett added that Republican leaders were pushed toward action by conservative groups "who felt that if there were no Senate action now, all of the inertia would be on the side of eventually legalizing" same-sex marriage nationally. "If the battle were to be joined, it had to be joined now," he said.

Bennett also conceded that many Republicans found it difficult to support the amendment "because they don't want to be seen as gay bashers," and Democrats were trying hard to say those who support it are gay bashing.

For example, Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., said during debate, "This is gay bashing, plain and simple. . . . This amendment seeks to divide America, and it is shameful."

In response, Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said to amendment critics, "If you support a mother and father for every child, you are a hater. If you believe men and women for 5,000 years have bonded together in marriage, you are a gay basher. Marriage is hate. Marriage is a stain."

Defeat of the amendment was hailed by gay and civil rights groups and lamented by conservative groups.

"The Senate has done the right thing by rejecting attempts to write discrimination into the Constitution," said Christopher E. Anders, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.

"Today's vote is a powerful repudiation of bigotry. It rejects unnecessary Constitution tampering and is a strong rebuke to the religious right," said Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

"Today's Senate vote marks the start of a democratic debate," said Matt Daniels president of the Alliance for Marriage. "Most Americans believe that gays and lesbians have a right to live as they choose. But they don't believe they have a right to redefine marriage for our entire society."

Of note, the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints last week took a rare political stand and said it favors a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage, but it did not specifically back any particular version.

Among LDS members in the Senate, Hatch, Bennett and Gordon Smith, R-Ore., and Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, voted for the procedural motion on Wednesday, and Senate Minority Whip Harry Reid, D-Nev., voted against it.

---

E-mail: lee@desnews.com