On the recordNovember 7, 2007
one of the big concerns that many of us have with legislation of this type is that courts across the country have used it to establish public policy, and then certain judges have taken that and determined from that public policy that they are going to redefine the institution of marriage. In considering this bill, I am deeply troubled by not only what is in the bill, but where I believe this bill is leading us. And you don't have to take my word for it. A memo from the Marriage Law Project at Catholic University's Columbus School of Law noted this: ``ENDA is about more than jobs. It is also about marriage. ENDA is based on the idea that State laws restricting marriage to the union of one man and one woman are a `subterfuge' for discrimination against homosexuals and bisexuals. If the courts accept the proposition that marriage is a `subterfuge' for discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, the Defense of Marriage Act will be struck down as unconstitutional.'' And that is the goal, Mr. Speaker. This legislation will ultimately allow activist judges across the country to redefine the institution of marriage. The majority might say that is not their intent, but I guarantee that is exactly what will happen if ENDA passes as it is. If we don't vote to stop it, then we are tacitly allowing one of our most sacred institutions to be torn down.
Source
govinfo.gov




