Marriage Amendment Research Articles

Supremacy by Law: The One Man One Woman Marriage Requirement and Antimiscegenation Law

SUMMARY This article is concerned with epistemology and the assertion of supremacy. Focusing on the resources deployed to make marriage restrictions logical, this article investigates their descriptive and structural underpinnings. I juxtapose support for the Defense of Marriage Act and Federal Marriage Amendment with antimiscegenation case law and examine descriptions of fact, the patterns they shape, and the underlying structure that holds them together. These laws are an arena of contestation not only over policy choices but over God and nature, and ultimately difference. I pay attention to the ways in which constructions of difference work to exclude and erase and I argue that these laws share a common structure of supremacy. Dualistic constructions of difference work to erase those whose bodies threaten the clear lines that justify exclusion by law. Those who are multiracial, where whiteness is a contributor, and those who are bisexual represent such a threat to racial marriage bans on the one hand and same sex marriage bans on the other. The formula of difference-making, erasure, and supremacy in law has important implications not only for challenging marriage restrictions today but to measure future law and policy.

Queer & Ally Youth Involvement in the Fair Wisconsin Campaign

ABSTRACT This article discusses the role and experience of queer youth and allies in the Fair Wisconsin campaign that fought against the marriage amendment to that state's constitution. It illustrates how LGBT and ally youth involvement can be incorporated into other organizations. Following an explanation of the campaign, are narratives of two extraordinary youth activists who became integral parts of the campaign.

Marriage Amendment Ballots of 2004: Could State Residents Read Them?

SUMMARY Close to 43% of adults have difficulties reading and understanding printed materials. Given the fact that so many American adults have difficulty reading basic text, we were interested in looking at the readability levels of the marriage amendment ballots of the 2004 election. Results indicated, with the exception of two states, a mismatch between the educational levels and the readability levels of the proposed amendments. Legal recognition of same-sex civil marriages can be considered a mental health public policy issue and therefore public health professionals should advocate for easier to read and understand ballots.

Faithful Political Rhetoric

Faithful Political Rhetoric Kristy Maddux (bio) Failing America’s Faithful: How Today’s Churches Are Mixing God with Politics and Losing their Way. By Kathleen Kennedy Townsend. New York: Warner Books, 2007; pp xv + 206. $24.99. God’s Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It. By Jim Wallis. New York: HarperCollins, 2005; pp xxvi + 384. $24.95. The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church. By Gregory A. Boyd. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005; pp 207. $19.99. Tempting Faith: An Inside Story of Political Seduction. By David Kuo. New York: Free Press, 2006; pp xiv + 283. $25.00. Thy Kingdom Come: How the Religious Right Distorts the Faith and Threatens America: An Evangelical’s Lament. By Randall Balmer. New York: Perseus Books, 2006; pp xxviii + 242. $24.95. Why the Christian Right Is Wrong: A Minister’s Manifesto for Taking Back Your Faith, Your Flag, Your Future. By Robin Meyers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2006; pp xvii + 203. $22.95. With the reelection of George W. Bush in 2004, it seemed that evangelical Christians had arrived as a political force. When exit poll data showed a correlation between voters’ concern over “moral values” and their preference [End Page 133] for George W. Bush and the Republican Party, journalists had a framework for interpreting the election: all credit for Bush’s reelection was due to the “values voters.”1 If Bush owed his political fortunes to the evangelical Christians, this narrative held, we could expect to see their policy demands—including a federal same-sex marriage amendment and strict constructionists appointed to the Supreme Court—realized in his second term. Evangelical Christians’ political reign may have been short-lived, however. Less than three years later, with the passing of Jerry Falwell, the same journalists seized upon a narrative of a movement in transition.2 No longer will evangelical Christians maintain their single-minded focus on the personal morality issues, nor will they be devoted to the Republican Party, journalists predicted. Instead, the movement’s new standard-bearers will be preachers like Rick Warren and Bill Hybels, whose broader vision encourages evangelical Christians to attend to issues such as poverty, HIV/AIDS, and the environment. Ubiquitous as these narratives became, they are overly simplistic. Too often, what has gone unquestioned in these journalistic treatments of the “values voters” and evangelical Christian politics are the assumptions that religious values should influence political and electoral decision making, that faith-based influence in politics is a phenomenon newly created by the Christian Right, and that Christian values necessarily translate into social conservatism. Given the popularity of these narratives and these assumptions, it may be time for scholars in rhetorical studies to revisit the relationship between religion and U.S. politics. Roderick P. Hart brought this question to our attention more than 30 years ago with his publication of The Political Pulpit, in which he built upon Robert Bellah’s concept of civil religion to introduce the notion of a civic piety contract between church and state held stable by rhetorical practice.3 Steven R. Goldzwig then wrote of the significance of public theology, which he defined as “theologically-based discourse intentionally targeted for mass audiences in an attempt to influence the attitudes, beliefs and values of both religious and secular publics on public policy.”4 The reissue of Hart’s book in 2005 featured contemporary commentary on his original work, with Goldzwig and Martin J. Medhurst both suggesting that Hart’s thesis, although provocative, does not prove fully explanatory for the twenty-first-century context. As Medhurst argues, whereas Hart’s thesis may have described the symbolic, depoliticized practice of religion that defined postwar America, it cannot account for an era that has witnessed the emergence of groups like the Moral Majority and the Christian Coalition.5 Outside of rhetorical studies, a productive conversation about the influence of religion in contemporary politics is taking place in both scholarly and popular venues. At stake in this conversation, first, are legal issues: what role(s) do [End Page 134] the First Amendment’s free exercise and establishment clauses allow for...

Gay Marriage: For Better or for Worse? What We've Learned from the Evidence. By William N. EskridgeJr. and Darren R. Spedale. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Pp. ix+336. $29.95 cloth; $19.95 paper.

Gay Marriage: For Better or for Worse? What We've Learned from the Evidence. By William N. Eskridge Jr. and Darren R. Spedale. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Pp. ix+336. $29.95 cloth; $19.95 paper. In May 1989, the Danish Parliament enacted the Registered Partnership Act and thereby made Denmark the first nation officially to recognize same-sex unions and to bestow on lesbian and gay couples most of the rights and duties associated with marriage. In 1993, Norway followed Denmark's lead, as did Sweden in 1995, Iceland in 1996, and Finland in 2002. The Nordic countries thus were trailblazers in granting same-sex pairs what are now termed civil unions or domestic partnerships in the United States. Conservative U.S. commentators such as Stanley Kurtz and Robert Bork have made empirical allegations, based on the Scandinavian experience, that same-sex unions discourage differentsex couples from marrying and result in more children being raised outside of marriage. In 2004 and 2005, these assertions were the principal empirical grounds bolstering the Republican Party's defense of argument in support of passage of the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would ban same-sex unions in the United States. In Gay Marriage: For Better or for Worse? What We've Learned from the Evidence, Eskridge and Spedale rebut Kurtz, Bork, and Republicans such as former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum. The authors also address questions such as Has the legal recognition of same-sex partnerships in other countries had positive consequences for citizens in those countries? (p. 13) The book's most compelling analysis directly confronts the defense-of-marriage contentions of Kurtz, Bork, and Santorum. Eskridge and Spedale convincingly demonstrate that a twogeneration-long Nordic trend of declining marriage rates, rising divorce rates, and soaring rates of nonmarital births pre-dated, by well over a decade, the Scandinavian adoption of registered partnership laws and followed the liberalization of alternatives to marriage (such as cohabitation) and the expansion of exit options (such as no-fault divorce). Every bit as important, the introduction of registered partnerships did not at all accelerate those domesticrelations transformations. In fact, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden had more children raised by their biological parents after those countries adopted partnership laws (p. 172). The volume is chock-full of human interest. The story of Eigil and Axel Axgil, a pioneering male couple who championed gay rights and same-sex unions in Denmark starting in the 1950s, introduces one chapter. Barry Winter and Per Kjaer, depicted as the authors' bear couple, begin another (bear is slang for gay males who are burly and hairy and thus resemble bears). …

Polynesia in Review: Issues and Events, 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2007

Polynesia in Review:Issues and Events, 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2007 Jon Tikivanotau M Jonassen (bio) The period under review was dominated by an unprecedented call for general elections, parliamentary conflicts, and budget approval constraints that at times tested the interpretation of the powers of the head of state. Ongoing out-migration of Cook Islanders, environmental problems, and continuing inflation slipped under the radar as politicians pushed for major salary increases and most Cook Islanders struggled from paycheck to paycheck. The popular American television series Survivor, and some sporting successes, provided some respite, but an unpredictable tourist industry, technical personnel limitations, and occasional invasive diseases and insects reminded Cook Islanders to be constantly vigilant. July 2006 began with continuing concern by many observers about the leak of the Queen's Honours list from the office of Prime Minister Jim Marurai, which he dismissed as "unimportant" (CIN, 5 July, 4). Perhaps of more concern to Marurai were political undercurrents aimed toward replacing him and the Speaker of the House (CIN, 6 July 2006, 1). Meanwhile, one of the laws finalized by the Cook Islands Parliament was a Marriage Amendment Bill outlawing marriages between homosexuals. The law was clearly designed to counter the provisions of New Zealand's civil union legislation (CIN, 19 July 2006, 1). Government also committed itself to a variety of programs including the development of geotourism through an agreement signed by Tourism Minister Wilkie Rasmussen and Sarah Laskin, vice president of public and business development for National Geographic. The agreement obligated the island country to adhere to fourteen geotourism principles designed to sustain and enhance the geographic character of a given place, including the environment, culture, aesthetics, and the well-being of its people. In return, National Geographic promised to produce maps and brochures "which identify the unique features of the Cook Islands" (CIN, 2 Aug, 2006, 1). The Cook Islands becomes only the fourth country to accede to the charter. In July Teina Bishop, member for Arutanga (Aitutaki), resigned from his cabinet post realigning himself with the opposition Cook Islands Party (CIP). Not long after, Kiriau Turepu (CIP) won the snap election for the Matavera (Rarotonga) constituency, potentially changing the balance of power in Parliament and creating a footing for a change of government (CIN, 20 July 2006, 1). The political battle intensified when opposition CIP members met in Parliament without Democratic Party (Demo) government members. After swearing in the [End Page 216] newly elected Kiriau Turepu, they voted the Demo government out. The event was broadcast live on national radio, attracting accusations of a coup attempt bordering on sedition and treason. The extraordinary chain of events became even more confusing when Queen's Representative Sir Frederick Goodwin called for a general election. This essentially negated the by-election just won by Turepu and preempted the later attempt by CIP parliamentarians to use a vote of no confidence to force a change of government (CIN, 25 July 2006). The high court was drawn into the drama amid accusations of political maneuvering on both sides of the aisle. Meanwhile, caretaker Prime Minister Jim Marurai tried to reassure the general population that there was no cause for alarm (CIN, 25 July 2006, 1). The election was set for 26 September 2006. Sir Geoffrey Arama Henry announced his retirement from the Cook Islands Party leadership effective 31 August 2006, and as member of Parliament representing the Takuvaine (Rarotonga) constituency. Mark Brown replaced Henry as CIP candidate for Takuvaine, and Tom Marsters, the member of Parliament for Murienua (Rarotonga), was eventually elected to lead the Cook Islands Party in Parliament (CIN, 13 Dec 2006, 1). The party now faces multiple challenges: new leadership, a seemingly overzealous head of state, possible court challenges, and a pending general election. As candidates filed their nominations for the elections, Wilkie Rasmussen switched his allegiance to the Democratic Party. He had originally won his seat by nine votes over Demo candidate Tepure Tapaitau CIN, 10 Aug 2006, 1). Apparently catching the campaign committee off guard, the Cook Islands Party failed to nominate a substitute candidate, so Rasmussen entered the election unopposed. The election was hotly contested for 23 of the 24 seats. After some...

Indiana Proposed Defense of Marriage Amendment: What Will It Do and Why Is It Needed

Indiana Proposed Defense of Marriage Amendment: What Will It Do and Why Is It Needed

Moving the Story, with Conviction: On the LDS Church and the Marriage Amendment

Moving the Story, with Conviction: On the LDS Church and the Marriage Amendment

Impact of Same-Sex Harassment and Gender-Role Stereotypes on Title VII Protection for Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Employees

When victimized in the workplace, gay, lesbian, and bisexual (GLB) employees often find themselves without recourse as Title VII does not recognize sexual orientation to be a protected class. We suggest that recent court decisions that have expanded Title VII to protect individuals from discrimination based upon violations of gender norms can be used to provide a basis for protection of GLB individuals under this statute. Using a review of the role of gender norms in the workplace as well as an analysis of recent court decisions and the Congressional debates on the Federal Marriage Amendment as well as the wording of the Defense of Marriage Act [Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), Pub. L. 104-199, Stat. 2419 (September 21, 1996)], this paper provides the theoretical background and conceptual argument (but does not attempt to make the legal argument) to suggest that same-sex harassment and discrimination are considered violations of societal gender norms and should therefore be protected under the expanded coverage of Title VII.

Social Developments in Massachusetts and Elsewhere Ensuing Upon Same-Sex-Marriage Initiatives

This article consists of testimony presented on October 20, 2005 to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Property Rights of the Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate. It concludes that the social consequences of legal developments promoting same-sex marriage (SSM) be extensive, as indicated by developments to date in Massachusetts (and in other jurisdictions which have traveled similar road). Educational practices are affected. Citing the leading SSM court decision as a historic moment, the Superintendent of the Boston Public School has established zero-tolerance policy for speech which may create climate of intolerance, effectively chilling discourse adverse to SSM and similar initiatives. Also citing that decision, teacher in suburban school teaches her eighth-graders about sex toys. Parents who object are shut out of the decision-making system. The definitions of marriage and the family become confused and blurred. [C]ivil marriage, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health announces, is an evolving paradigm. The barriers between marriage and cohabitation collapse. The Ontario legislature, under the prodding of judicial mandate, has gone so far as to redefine spouse to include people who are not married. Nonmarital cohabitation has become more acceptable and has increased in frequency. In America and other countries, cohabitation often leads to family turbulence and parental separation, leaving the children to be raised by reconstituted couples, preponderantly by their biological mother and her new partner. These arrangements have been shown to lead to higher level of physical and sexual abuse. The article maintains that developments such as these support the adoption of the Federal Marriage Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Group Sees Harm to Kids in Marriage Amendment

Group Sees Harm to Kids in Marriage Amendment

Homophobia Perpetuated

This article traces the history of Inquiry into the Marriage Amendment Bill 2004 and ensuing legislation and explores constitutional and international law issues in the context of that history. The authors argue that the aborted Inquiry and the Marriage Amendment Bill 2004 significantly weaken Australia's claim to be an egalitarian society and serve as a poignant reminder that pseudoegalitarian ideals such as 'mateship' and a 'fair go' are no protection against measures that marginalise vulnerable minorities for political gain. The resultant amendments to the Marriage Act 1961 perpetuate homophobia and marginalise gay, lesbian, transgender and intersex Australians.

Moral Issues and Voter Decision Making in the 2004 Presidential Election

“President Bush's victory, the approval of every anti-gay marriage amendment on statewide ballots and an emphasis on ‘moral values’ among voters showed the power of churchgoing Americans in this election and threw the nation's religious divide into stark relief.” Associated Press, November 4, 2004

The Federal Marriage Amendment and the Strange Evolution of the Conservative Case against Gay Marriage

The idea for a Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) did not suddenly dawn upon Senate Republicans in the summer of 2004, when debate on the amendment began in earnest on the floor of the U.S. Senate. Despite the passage of the federal Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, conservatives have long worried about what they believe are the threats to traditional heterosexual marriage posed by the courts. Their fears peaked in 2003, when the courts struck twice: the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Texas that state homosexual sodomy laws are unconstitutional, while the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health ordered state officials to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

A Becoming Queer Aesthetic

A Becoming Queer Aesthetic Mary T. Conway (bio) A young man ran up to us to enthuse over the event, saying, "It was the wedding of the future," meaning, I supposed, the form of it, not (necessarily) the political aspect. —Jill Johnston 220 Isn't that the ultimate homeland security? Standing up and defending marriage? —Senator Rick Santorum The Fluxwedding (1993) held in Odense, Denmark confounded, delighted and sometimes terrified those in attendance. The day began with a brief, legal City Hall ceremony between lesbian author Jill Johnston and her partner Ingrid Nyeboe. But wedding conventions were then undermined, as Fluxus artist Geoff Hendricks presided over what followed. The Fluxwedding party performed a Fluxprocession, marching down a walking street (closed to motor vehicles) in Odense. Two boom boxes competed, one playing the overture to Lohengrin, the other the story of Bambi in Danish. A Great Dane led the procession while art students handed out chrysanthemums. And the Wedding Dress, a blue, thirty-person monstrosity, navigated its way back to the Kunsthallen Brandts Klaedefabrik (school and museum), where the event was continued amidst Hendricks' retrospective, "Day Into Night." After the [End Page 166] Fluxceremony, the couple entered Hendricks' 1979 Sky Car, a VW Bug painted like the sky, tossed their bouquets to the crowd and, as the car stood still, Hendricks jangled tin cans at the back bumper. While Fluxus artists invented new ways to marry, U.S. politicians legislated against same sex marriage. In July 2004, U.S. Senate Republicans proposed the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA), which would have changed the Constitution to outlaw same sex marriages. Senator Santorum (R-PA) equated defending marriage with homeland security, while National Public Radio commentator Connie Rice (second cousin to Condoleeza) called the Republican use of same sex marriage "a weapon of mass distraction." My aim in this essay is to wrangle queer weddings from politics and examine the promise of formal effects in wedding ceremonies. Since 1996, when then-President Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a few states have challenged the federal law, and gay men and lesbians have lined up at their City Halls, eager to take advantage of their state-sanctioned right to marry. Their actions are pragmatic: the rights and benefits conferred upon the married exceed the unmarried. But in the haste to oppose DOMA and FMA, we overlook what might hold the most promise in challenging the law's logic, namely something we might call the aesthetic. Legislation hindering same sex marriage exerts considerable social and political power. Yet such a legal force obscures the non-political aspects of queer marriage, which can be considerable sources of another sort of power. Before and after DOMA's passage, gays and lesbians ceremoniously acknowledged their unions, albeit without news cameras or legalization. What is remarkable about the majority of these ceremonies is how unremarkable they are: gay and lesbian marriage ceremonies are largely indistinguishable from their heterosexual counterparts. Why do gays and lesbians so often marry in the same way as heterosexuals? Why is any complicated aesthetic, let alone a queer aesthetic, absent from the majority of weddings? An aesthetic of the sublime, rather than the beautiful, has the potential to disorient the exclusively political imperatives of same sex weddings. I will argue that, in the rush to make a political stand, and quickly be married, opportunities for aesthetic effects are missed in the ritual of becoming married. If there is a queer aesthetic, it is not evident in these rush-to-status ceremonies. A queer aesthetic might be evident in the Fluxwedding, suggesting how a queer marriage ceremony might differ from traditional weddings, and from tradition-miming homosexual weddings. The Fluxwedding's effects are difficult to incorporate into the political aims of either advocates [End Page 167] or opponents of same sex marriage. Such a resistance to utility might explain why this queer wedding has been almost entirely overlooked in writing about same-sex marriage. In this essay I highlight the similarities between what appear to be opposing positions in the same-sex marriage debate, and attend to one overlooked aspect of that debate: the ritual practice of becoming married. By seeing the possibilities of performance...

The Conservative Case against the Federal Marriage Amendment

This Essay criticizes the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment as inconsistent with the principle of federalism. It argues that after recent Supreme Court decisions on the rights of gays, it is likely that federal and state laws discriminating against the recognition of same-sex marriages are likely to be found unconstitutional. It then argues that a constitutional amendment defining marriage is inconsistent with the purposes behind our federal system of government, and that a more preferable approach would preserve to each state the ability to define marriage for itself.

Sweet Land of Liberty: The Case against the Federal Marriage Amendment

Sweet Land of Liberty: The Case against the Federal Marriage Amendment

Divorce in Hindu Society

Until recently for Hindus marriage was obligatory and sacramental. Hindus strongly believe that parents souls find rest only when the son performs the last rites. Initially marriage was considered equally binding to men and women but later law-givers admonished the wife to be completely devoted to her husband. The most important and effective legislation for divorce was the Hindu Marriage and Divorce Act of 1955 which offered equal opportunity to the wife and husband to separate or even to terminate their marriage. This study examines 200 cases (comprising several major castes) in Indore City india. The primary data was from judicial files supplemented by interviews. 9% of the husbands and 17.5% of the wives were illiterate or semi-literate. Over 40% of all divorces were among Brahmins. 25.5% of the husbands and 83.5% of the wives were unemployed. 50% of the respondents felt that their marriages were arranged without thorough enquiry and planning. 48% of the wives were aged 16-20 when they got married; most men married between ages 21 and 25. Reasons for divorce in this study include 1) cruelty 2) interference by in-laws 3) extramarital relations and 4) sexual dissatisfaction. The Marriage Amendment of 1976 reduced the period of waiting for a divorce from the former average of 5-8 years to less than a year. The number of divorces increased suddenly in 1976 and continues to rise yearly. 65% of the men divorced between ages 26 and 35 and 67.5% of the women divorced between ages 21 and 30. Public opinion regarding divorce and divorcees varies among communities. 2/3 of the mothers (and their relatives) in this study supported the children. 75.5% of the men in the study had remarried by the time of the study while only 35% of the women had remarried.

Conflict of Laws. Jurisdiction of Courts: Divorce. Foreign Decrees Entitled to Recognition When Jurisdiction Is Assumed under Deserted-Wife Statutes. Marriage (Amendment) Act, 1957, Act No. 6186 of 1957, Section 4 (Victoria, Austl.)

Conflict of Laws. Jurisdiction of Courts: Divorce. Foreign Decrees Entitled to Recognition When Jurisdiction Is Assumed under Deserted-Wife Statutes. Marriage (Amendment) Act, 1957, Act No. 6186 of 1957, Section 4 (Victoria, Austl.)