Jack Kingston

Today, the House will be debating a Constitutional Amendment to defend traditional marriage. You can read the text of the legislation here.

In the next 30 minutes, Jack will be managing the debate on this bill for the majority.

I’ll be liveblogging the debate on this space.

-Ashley

FULL LIVEBLOG AFTER THE JUMP

UPDATE (11:02 AM): Jack will be taking to the floor shortly. The debate is being aired live on C-SPAN. If you don’t have access to a TV, you can find the webstream here.

UPDATE (11:34 AM): Jack is taking the floor now. Let the debate begin…

UPDATE (11:38 AM): Quotes from Jack’s Opening Remarks:

• “Activist judges have eroded the intent of Congress.”
• “No governmental entity shall be allowed to alter the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman.”
• “69% of Americans strongly agree that marriage should be defined as one man and one woman.”
• “Why is it necessary if the states are handling it? There are great and deliberate challenges to DOMA.”
• “We are very involved in the issues of today, and marriage is one of the top tier issues.”
• “This is not a battle we have chosen to have, but one that the court has put on us.”

UPDATE (11:51 AM): Jack says: “16 States have recently passed marriage protection amendments with an average of 70% approval.”

UPDATE (11:53 AM): Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (CO) discusses the importance of the potential negative effects on children of not protecting traditional marriage. “Every child deserves both a mother and a father.” “Statistically, we know this: children thrive best when they are raised in a traditional family.” “The statistical dice are loaded against children raised without a mother and a father.”

Musgrave brings up the validity of debating this issue now stating that, “If we have enough time to rename post offices and federal buildings we have time to debate [this issue].”

The Congresswoman brings up the American people’s support of discussing the issue as well. “The opponents want us to wait on the Supreme Court to make this decision…the American people want us to settle this issue now.”

UPDATE (12:09 PM): Rep. Lungren (CA) brings up the fundamental issue at hand: “Do you believe there is reason to maintain the traditional union of marriage? That’s the simple question before us.”

The Congressman addresses the issue of who started this debate, reminding Congress that “this debate began with activist judges who said ‘times have changed and so the definition of marriage has too.’ ” He reimphasizes that this is not a debate that anyone wanted, but it is one that has been brought to the table and must be addressed.

UPDATE (12:12 PM): Rep. Barrett (SC):

• “The debate today is about ensuring the will of the people is protected.”
• “The message is clear–marriage matters.”

UPDATE (12:16 PM): Jack points out to the opponents that…”Under H.R. Res 88 state legislatures can allow same-sex benefits in the unions.”

UPDATE (12:19 PM): On the contrary to what Rep. Delahunt (D-MA) would have you believe, the average American is worried about marriage.

A constituent just emailed this to Rep. Kingston:

Rep. Mike Pence (IN):

• “This debate today is not about discrimination…but tolerance does not require that we allow the courts to define this institution.”
• “Let’s say yes to marriage as it is traditionally defined and let’s say no to activist judges.”

UPDATE (12:24 PM): Our office sent around this note to our constituent email list of nearly 18,000 constituents.

A Quick Note From The Office Of Jack Kingston

Congressman Jack Kingston (R-Savannah) is currently leading the debate for the majority on the House floor to take another step forward in the American Values Agenda and lead the defense of traditional marriage against activist and out-of-touch judges.

As a member of the Republican House Leadership, Congressman Kingston is managing consideration of H.J.Res. 88, the Marriage Protection Amendment, which was introduced by Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO).

The Amendment protects the institution of marriage between a man and a women and leaves benefits issues to the states. The Amendment is part of the American Values Agenda that House Republicans unveiled in June.

While 45 of the 50 states have either a state Constitutional Amendment or statute preserving the current definition of marriage, activist, leftwing judges and officials at the local levels have struck down state laws protecting marriage. Republicans believe the American people should decide this issue, not out-of-touch judges who are bent on redefining what constitutes marriage.

Ashley, an intern for Rep. Kingston is liveblogging the debate at Jack’s Blog (http://kingston.house.gov/blog) and you can tune in to CSPAN right now to watch the debate unfold.

Thank you,

Office of Congressman Jack Kingston

UPDATE (12:33 PM): Rep. Graves (R-MO) says: “44 of 50 states, which is 90% of states and 88% of population, define marriage in traditional terms as between a man and a woman.”

UPDATE (12:44 PM): Rep. Akin (R-MO) discusses the “love” issue: “the point that has to be made is that marriage is not about love; it’s abuot a love that can bear children and that replenishes society along those lines.” He notes the difference in the love you have for your parents or children in contrast to the love between a married man and woman.

UPDATE (12:54 PM): Majority Leader Boehner warns about the threat of activist judges at the local level who have struck down state laws that protect traditional marriage.

UPDATE (1:00 PM): Rep. Forbes (R-VA) brings up, “the founding fathers wouldn’t have dreamed that we would have to be discussing defining marriage as between a man and a woman.”

Forbes points out the potential slippery slope that allowing same-sex marriage creates, stating that the same logic that is being used to defend same-sex marriage could potentially defend marriage between a teacher and a 13 yr. old or a husband and three wives, two instances that no one would realistically defend.

The Congressman defends the importance of debating this issue despite the fact that the amendment will most likely not pass saying, “we try because we believe values are still important in America and marriage is a cornerstone of those values.”

UPDATE (1:05 PM): Jack reminds Members, “Arizona and Utah had to redefine marriage as between a man and woman in order to become states.”

UPDATE (1:08 PM): Kingston reiterates the point that, in the opponents’ effort to “prevent against discrimination,” by not defining marriage as between a man and a woman, they are leaving open the door for polygomists, etc. to be included under the definition of marriage.

UPDATE (1:10 PM): Rep. Foxx (R-NC) gives an “Amen” to her colleagues who have stood in support of this issue.

Amen, Rep.Foxx.

UPDATE (1:13 PM): Jack encourages those who want to see “hateful” speech should watch the ads that have been run against Rep. Musgrave for sponsoring this amendment.

UPDATE (1:21 PM): Rep.Weldon (R-FL):

• “Marriage is an honored institution in this country.”
• “Our goal is to preserve the most basic institution in this society.”
• “If children are benefitting from traditional families we always must fight; it is always worth protecting.”
• “We are protecting clergy so they can marry a man and a woman and are not forced by the courts to marry a man and a man.”

UPDATE (1:32 PM): Rep.Musgrave reminds us that “if marriage can mean anything, eventually it will mean nothing.”

UPDATE (2:15 PM): The Amendment, which needed 2/3 majority to pass, failed. The final vote tally was 236-187 with one Democrat voting “present” and seven Members not voting.

UPDATE 2:31 PM): The Speaker issued this statement:

“For thousands of years the definition of marriage has been the union between one man and one woman. Marriage is the very foundation of our society where families are formed and communities are established. Today we are seeking to protect this vital institution as it is under attack by activist judges across the nation. Forty-five states have passed laws or constitutional amendments defining marriage between a man and a woman, yet non-elected, liberally motivated judges have overturned the voice of the American people time after time. It’s unfortunate that more than a majority of democrats today have sided with these liberal judges and voted against this measure. Be assured that this issue is not over and that we will continue to send a message to the American people that preserving and protecting marriage is a priority and we will continue to fight for the American family on this front and others.”