U.S. House fails to pass Constitutional amendment

The amendment failed to receive the necessary two-thirds majority support, which is required to approve a proposed Constitutional amendment in the U.S. House of Representatives. The resolution received the support of 191 Republicans and 36 Democrats.

"I've always believed that marriage should retain its historic meaning as a union between a man and a woman," Ehlers said. "Since activist judges seem bent on changing that definition, a Constitutional amendment is our only recourse to stem the tide."

The amendment, formally designated as House Joint Resolution (H.J. Res.) 106, proposes the following language to be added to the U.S. Constitution:

"Marriage in the United States shall consist solely of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman."

Ehlers said the effort to approve the amendment was spurred on by a recent Massachusetts court ruling granting same-sex couples the right to marry, as well as other legal challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act, which was approved by a bipartisan Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996. In response, at least 10 states will have voter referenda on their November ballots that would define marriage as being between only a man and a woman.

"I am pleased that this amendment is worded to allow states to deal with other issues surrounding marriages, which have traditionally been the responsibility of the states, as well as whether they choose to recognize domestic partnerships," Ehlers said. "But we cannot and should not stand idly by as activist judges attempt to redefine the institution of marriage."