NAACP Takes a Interesting Stand

[Professor]

NAACP TESTIFIES BEFORE SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE HEARING OPPOSING
DISCRIMINATORY CONSTITUTIONAL BAN ON MARRIAGE

Nation's Oldest and Largest Grassroots Civil Rights Organization
Announces Strong Opposition to Amendment that Would Discriminate and
Restrict Rights

WASHINGTON - The Human Rights Campaign applauded the testimony of Hilary
Shelton, director of the Washington, D.C., Bureau of The National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People, today before a Senate
subcommittee hearing. Shelton announced the group's strong opposition to
a constitutional ban on marriage rights for same-sex couples.

"Our elected officials should heed the testimony of one of our nation's
foremost civil rights organizations - denying rights to Americans has no
place in our nation's Constitution," said HRC President Cheryl Jacques,
who also submitted written testimony. "As Mr. Shelton spoke, a room full
of families listened - families who would clearly be hurt by such an
amendment. Denying those hard-working, tax-paying Americans equal rights
under the law is wrong, and using the Constitution to single out those
families for discrimination would be un-American."

"The NAACP is greatly disappointed that President George Bush and others
have decided to enter this election cycle by endorsing an amendment that
would forever write discrimination into the U.S. Constitution, rather
than focusing on the crucial problems and challenges that affect the

lives of all of us," testified Shelton. "At a time of record high

unemployment, diminishing job prospects, a ballooning budget deficit

that is choking our economy and crucial social service programs, a
public school system that is in great need of attention and a health
care system that is failing over 43 million Americans that remain
uninsured over the past three years. This discriminatory constitutional
amendment appears to be nothing more than a highly divisive political
ploy to distract the country from focusing on our overabundance of real
problems and our tremendous lack of creative and effective solutions."

The hearing was held by the Senate Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on
the Constitution, civil rights and property rights. Sen. John Cornyn,
R-Texas, presided over the hearing, along with ranking member Sen. Russ
Feingold, D-Wisc. Other minority members who attended were Sens. Richard

Durbin, D-Ill., Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. Two
other witnesses - Lea Brilmayer, Yale University Professor of Law, and
Chuck Muth, founder of Citizen Outreach - also spoke in opposition to a
discriminatory amendment.

"We applaud Senators Feingold, Durbin, Kennedy and Leahy for their
leadership in the hearing today," said Jacques. "And we sincerely thank
Senators Chafee and Dayton for showing bipartisan opposition to the
amendment at a press conference earlier this morning."

Sens. Lincoln Chafee, R-R.I., and Mark Dayton, D-Minn., joined a broad
range of individuals speaking in opposition to amendment at a press
conference before the hearing. Manuel Mirabel, chair of the National
Hispanic Leadership Agenda, announced the group's opposition to the
amendment, saying it is "divisive, discriminatory and seeks to treat one
group of citizens differently from everybody else."

Heather McCabe and Staci Winters of Maryland, who have been together for
11 years and are mothers of 4-year-old triplets, also spoke at the press
conference.

"Make no mistake, this amendment would not protect my children," said
Winters. "There are more than 1 million children like Sam, Cole and
Annabel - children being raised in loving homes headed by same-sex
couples. Every respected child welfare group has said these parents are
just as good as other parents. This amendment, though, would ensure that
these parents are forever denied important legal protections that come
with marriage."

"We will work to ensure that no child is left behind by our nation's
Constitution," added Jacques.

The Human Rights Campaign is the largest national lesbian, gay, bisexual
and transgender political organization with members throughout the
country. It effectively lobbies Congress, provides campaign support and
educates the public to ensure that LGBT Americans can be open, honest
and safe at home, at work and in the community.

[Honeykiss1974]

Interesting to say the least

[mccoyred]

I agree that the ban has no place in the Constitution because it is ONLY the (50) States that has the power to grant a license for marriage, civil union, etc. However, I am not sure that I would support a law in my State to allow this type of union, though.....

[ARTIC-U-LATE]

Thanks for the info. Bro. Prof:

Very interesting statements by others. I do feel that placing discrimination in the constitution is a mistake. I would have to echo the sentiments of so many others stating that this particular decision should voted upon by each individual state. To outlaw the union of two loving persons on a federal level... is a bit much.

I must say that it IS quite interesting that at this very crucial time (presidential race), a person possibly running for re-election would actually speak so strongly on a "touchy" issue.

I commend the efforts and firmness of the NAACP on this issue. It had definately remained consistent with its advocacy of the ignored.

[sphinxpoet]

Personally I do not support gay marriage but I cannot support a constitutional amendment that infringes on states rights. I do not believe you should oppress a minority of any kind. Should they have the right to marry that depends on what you believe. I believe marriage is a godly institution but homosexual marriage contradicts that. But in terms of States rights legally the state should protect those that are being oppressed. Kudos to the NAACP for taking a stand.

Sphinxpoet

[ladygreek]

Originally posted by sphinxpoet
Personally I do not support gay marriage but I cannot support a constitutional amendment that infringes on states rights. I do not believe you should oppress a minority of any kind. Should they have the right to marry that depends on what you believe. I believe marriage is a godly institution but homosexual marriage contradicts that. But in terms of States rights legally the state should protect those that are being oppressed. Kudos to the NAACP for taking a stand.

Sphinxpoet

We had quite a spirited discussion about this in another forum. I understand your belief that marriage is a Godly institution, but the reality of it is that legally it is a civil institution and can be performed by anyone licensed to do so. So the bottom line here is denying one group their civil liberties leads to denying other groups theirs (as we as Black folk know oh too well.) I, too applaud the NAACP for taking the stand.

BTW, everyone check out the website for the National Black Justice Coalition www.nbjcoalition.org on this issue and others.

[sphinxpoet]

Originally posted by ladygreek
We had quite a spirited discussion about this in another forum. I understand your belief that marriage is a Godly institution, but the reality of it is that legally it is a civil institution and can be performed by anyone licensed to do so. So the bottom line here is denying one group their civil liberties leads to denying other groups theirs (as we as Black folk know oh too well.) I, too applaud the NAACP for taking the stand.

BTW, everyone check out the website for the National Black Justice Coalition www.nbjcoalition.org on this issue and others.

OH I agree with you legally you cannot deny an indvidual thier human right to marry!