Protecting marriage and children

By CHRISTIE L. CHICOINE
CS&T Staff Writer

The U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation July 22 that limits federal court jurisdiction over same-sex marriage questions, but approval of the bill in the Senate is considered less likely.
The Marriage Protection Act, adopted on a 233-194 vote, stipulates that “no court created by act of Congress shall have any jurisdiction, and the Supreme Court shall have no appellate jurisdiction, to hear or decide any question pertaining to the interpretation of, or the validity under the Constitution” of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.
The earlier legislation protects the right of states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.
Philadelphia-area representatives who voted for the Marriage Protection Act were Joseph R. Pitts (R-16, including part of Chester County); Patrick J. Toomey (R-15, including part of Montgomery County) and Curt Weldon (R-7, including parts of Chester, Delaware and Montgomery counties).
Congressman Pitts called the Marriage Protection Act a Constitutional remedy to a looming Constitutional crisis. “This bill is about protecting marriage and our children,” said Pitts.
“Marriage is the foundation of our society. No one has the right to use the courts to redefine the family. That’s what we have elected representatives for — to debate, to deliberate, to vote.”
The foundation of society must be preserved and defended, Pitts added. “We begin by defending the right of states like Pennsylvania to define marriage like it has always been defined and will always be defined in the hearts of the overwhelming majority of the American people.”
Said Congressman Toomey: “I voted to support the Marriage Protection Act because there are liberal activist judges who, if left unchecked, will redefine marriage by judicial edict.
“Courts overstepping their Constitutional bounds leave us with no choice but to relieve them of any authority over the definition of marriage,” he said.
“Fortunately,” Toomey added, “a clear majority of my colleagues agree that marriage should continue to be defined as a union between one man and one woman.”
The Archdiocese’s Office for Public Affairs applauded the legislation. “We thank Congressmen Weldon, Pitts and Toomey for supporting this brief but significant bill,” said Matthew Gambino, associate director of the archdiocesan office.
“States such as Pennsylvania recognize the proper definition of marriage as existing only between one man and one woman,” he said.
“This bill would prohibit federal courts from forcing states to recognize laws that attempt to redefine what God has made and human society has always upheld — the traditional understanding of marriage between man and woman,” Gambino added.
U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) was pleased with the House vote, said Christine Shott, his deputy press secretary.
“This vote in the House and the debate on the Federal Marriage Amendment in the Senate, are positive, first steps in protecting marriage from the liberal courts,” said Shott.
The Marriage Protection Act is distinct from the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would change the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. The Federal Marriage Amendment failed in the Senate on a procedural vote July 14, but the Marriage Protection Act has not been considered in the Senate.
U.S. Rep. John Hostettler (R-Ind.) introduced the Marriage Protection Act, which he said in an earlier statement “seeks to utilize the constitutional authority of Congress to limit the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary to hear cases” challenging the Defense of Marriage Act.
Responding to opponents who have called the legislation unconstitutional, Hostettler said the Constitution grants Congress “explicit and exclusive authority to create the inferior federal courts, regulate their jurisdiction and regulate the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.”
Added Hostettler: “It is obvious to anyone who actually reads the Constitution that we can do this.”
The U.S. bishops are strong supporters of the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage for federal purposes as a “legal union between one man and one woman” and bars partners in same-sex unions from receiving federal benefits that are available to spouses because of their marital status, such as spousal Social Security benefits.
Catholic News Service contributed to this article.

Contact Christie L. Chicoine at (215) 587-2468 or cchicoin@adphila.org.