Congressman Paul Broun, M.D., today announced he will be introducing a constitutional amendment to protect the traditional institution of marriage from re-definition by state or federal judges. Broun's "Marriage Protection Amendment" will be offered in response to the recent 4-3 decision by the California Supreme Court which redefined marriage' to include legal unions formed between homosexuals. The California Supreme Court's decision to recognize same-sex marriages is viewed by many legal scholars as an activist decision in which the policy preferences of four justices overturned the democratically expressed will of California's voters.
"Marriage as an institution exists solely between one man and one woman," said Broun. "Americans have traditionally recognized this definition as being the most beneficial arrangement for the creation of stable family structures and for the upbringing of children. In fact, Americans have repeatedly shown their preference for the traditional definition of one-man, one-woman marriage by passing State and Federal laws or by amending State constitutions to preserve the traditional definition."
Broun continued, "What the activist judges in California have shown is that the traditional definition of marriage is under assault by a cadre of lawyers and judges who hold the will of the voters in contempt. As a result, a political and social question that should be resolved at the ballot box is being imposed by a handful of liberal elites."
"There simply is no basis for the suggestion that homosexual marriage' is a right protected by the United States Constitution. The Founding Fathers would be appalled if they knew that their carefully constructed document was being twisted and corrupted to suddenly reveal a right to homosexual marriage where none previously existed. My amendment will preserve the original intent of the drafters of the Constitution, by ensuring that no State or Federal judge can take it upon themselves to suddenly discover a right to homosexual marriage' within the text of the document. It will also provide a defense against activist judges who seek to overturn the will of the people by manipulating State Constitutions in order to impose their preferred policy position."