From Deseret News archives:
Hatch: Ban gay unions
Utahn tells Senate an amendment is needed — and soon
"It has become clear that we need a constitutional solution to this problem. There is simply no other means of reining in activist judges who seek to impose their will," Hatch said in a Senate speech. His committee is where action for such an amendment would begin.
He added, "Without a constitutional amendment, we are headed for a resolution by the United States Supreme Court. We should not and cannot wait for this to happen. We must protect traditional marriage now by passing a constitutional amendment."
Hatch contended that a few activist judges in Massachusetts took away the role of the legislative branch to essentially enact homosexual marriage.
"People have the right to govern themselves. When a court which forces a radical decision on the people — well before the people have the opportunity to oppose the change — it dramatically undermines democracy's vitality and legitimacy," Hatch said.
He said that traditional marriage is the ideal for rearing children. Allowing same-sex marriages weakens that tradition and society, he said.
"Children are simply better off with a mother and a father than with two mothers or two fathers or any other alternative arrangement. Advocates for same-sex marriage cite studies to the contrary, but as Professor Steven Nock, a leading marriage scholar at the University of Virginia, points out, 'not a single one was conducted according to generally accepted standards of scientific research,' " Hatch said.
"Marriage is not about adult desires for affirmation and benefits, it is about the well-being of children. Two men being intimate are simply not the same as a husband and a wife, and alternative family forms are not just as good as traditional families. . . . Scandinavia, for example, witnessed a dramatic drop in traditional marriages once same-sex marriages were permitted. The net effect was to diminish the importance of marriage altogether, and that is what will happen here if we do not maintain the traditional definition of marriage as one man and one woman."
Hatch said, "Some suggest that it is not 'conservative' to amend the Constitution over such an issue. Baloney. . . . Traditional marriage is perhaps the most fundamental institution in culture and history. It dates back some 5,000 years. If the only way to protect this institution is by amending the Constitution — and we know that to be the case — then we have an obligation to do so."
Amending the Constitution requires a two-thirds majority vote by both houses of Congress, with ratification by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states.
E-mail: lee@desnews.com
