Today I continue with Congresswoman Rosa L. Delauro, Democrat, representative of Connecticut's 3rd Congressional District:
Dear Congresswoman Delauro,
I write seeking support for a Marriage Equality Amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the United States. Though recent events in Iowa and Vermont have moved the cause of marriage equality forward in important ways, discriminatory forces around the country have effectively blocked or rolled back progress for millions of Americans. Such a focused assault on citizens' rights demands a robust response, thus I and others propose that the federal constitution be amended to read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation."
As a member of Congress since 1981, you have been a long-term champion of civil rights in the House, consistently earning high marks from the ACLU, the NAACP, and the Human Rights Campaign. Moreover, as a devout Catholic who has thought and spoken with sensitivity and erudition about the complexity of reconciling faith and political engagement, you well understand the destructive ways in which the politicization of religion has distorted the discourse on this issue. In a speech delivered to the Pew Forum in 2006, you reaffirmed President Kennedy's declaration of principle: "I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant, nor Jewish where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches, or any other ecclesiastical source." This is the philosophy that should guide the expression of faith in our national politics, and the reason why the morality of marriage equality should be assessed first and foremost as a question of legal doctrine and civil rights, unclouded by the religious views of any particular confessional group.
Sponsorship of a Marriage Equality Amendment would be in keeping with the record of articulate, thoughtful, and courageous leadership that you have established in your more than two decades of service. I hope that you will see the wisdom of this campaign and lend it your voice. In any case, I thank you for your attention on this matter and extend my best wishes.
Sincerely,
Andrew Meyer
Monday, April 13, 2009
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Connecticut (IV) Congressman Joe Courtney
Today I continue with Congressman Joe Courtney, Democrat, representative of Connecticut's 2nd Congressional District:
Dear Congressman Courtney,
I write seeking your support for a Marriage Equality Amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the United States. Across the U.S. the tide of marriage equality has been rising. The recent court decision in Iowa and the courageous action of the Vermont legislature demonstrate that public awareness has shifted. A new generation of Americans understand that marriage equality is not a religious issue but a question of civil rights. At stake is whether all Americans will enjoy the "equal protection of the law," or whether a system of apartheid will persist in which millions are relegated to second-class citizenship.
Even so, those who support injustice and discrimination remain active, vocal, and exceedingly well-funded. The narrow passage of "Proposition 8" in California and the fear-mongering "Gathering Storm" ad campaign by the so-called "National Organization for Marriage" evince the determination of those who not only oppose the recognition of marriage equality rights moving forward, but would turn back the clock and restore America's illiberal past. Such a coordinated assault upon the rights of American citizens must be met with a robust response. For this reason I and others propose that the federal constitution be amended to read, "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation."
The fight for such a change to our basic law would obviously be long, difficult, and fraught with political peril. As a recently elected representative you no doubt will be cautious in choosing the issues to which you choose to lend your public advocacy. I recommend this campaign to you as not only right and just, but one which could effect real and positive change for millions of Americans in the long term. I have set out to write every member of Congress seeking support for a Marriage Equality Amendment. Please consider advocating for this reform among your colleagues in the House. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and extend my best wishes.
Sincerely,
Andrew Meyer
Dear Congressman Courtney,
I write seeking your support for a Marriage Equality Amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the United States. Across the U.S. the tide of marriage equality has been rising. The recent court decision in Iowa and the courageous action of the Vermont legislature demonstrate that public awareness has shifted. A new generation of Americans understand that marriage equality is not a religious issue but a question of civil rights. At stake is whether all Americans will enjoy the "equal protection of the law," or whether a system of apartheid will persist in which millions are relegated to second-class citizenship.
Even so, those who support injustice and discrimination remain active, vocal, and exceedingly well-funded. The narrow passage of "Proposition 8" in California and the fear-mongering "Gathering Storm" ad campaign by the so-called "National Organization for Marriage" evince the determination of those who not only oppose the recognition of marriage equality rights moving forward, but would turn back the clock and restore America's illiberal past. Such a coordinated assault upon the rights of American citizens must be met with a robust response. For this reason I and others propose that the federal constitution be amended to read, "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation."
The fight for such a change to our basic law would obviously be long, difficult, and fraught with political peril. As a recently elected representative you no doubt will be cautious in choosing the issues to which you choose to lend your public advocacy. I recommend this campaign to you as not only right and just, but one which could effect real and positive change for millions of Americans in the long term. I have set out to write every member of Congress seeking support for a Marriage Equality Amendment. Please consider advocating for this reform among your colleagues in the House. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and extend my best wishes.
Sincerely,
Andrew Meyer
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Connecticut (III) Congressman John B. Larson
Today I continue with Congressman John B. Larson, Democrat, representative of Connecticut's 1st Congressional District:
Dear Congressman Larson,
I write seeking your support for a Marriage Equality Amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the United States. Your home state was among the first to realize that affording all citizens "equal protection of the law" required that full marriage equality must be enjoyed by all couples regardless of gender. Though this was an inspirational victory, it has been attended by a distressing discriminatory backlash. Across the nation travesties like Proposition 8 in California have set out to systematically strip citizens of their rights. Such an assault must be met with an aggressive response, thus I and others are advocating that the federal constitution be amended to read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation.
Your record shows you sympathetic to the cause of marriage equality. You have earned a perfect positive rating from the Human Rights Campaign for each of the last three Congresses, and have voted consistently against the so-called "Marriage Protection Amendment" that would have nationally banned same-sex marriage. The fight for a Marriage Equality Amendment would obviously be long and fraught with political peril. It is the best means, however, to counteract the reprehensible tactics of those who would spread injustice and discrimination.
I have set out to write every member of Congress seeking a sponsor for this measure. Would you take up its cause, Congressman? I hope that you will see the justness of this reform and lend it your support among your colleagues in the House. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and extend my best wishes.
Sincerely,
Andrew Meyer
Dear Congressman Larson,
I write seeking your support for a Marriage Equality Amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the United States. Your home state was among the first to realize that affording all citizens "equal protection of the law" required that full marriage equality must be enjoyed by all couples regardless of gender. Though this was an inspirational victory, it has been attended by a distressing discriminatory backlash. Across the nation travesties like Proposition 8 in California have set out to systematically strip citizens of their rights. Such an assault must be met with an aggressive response, thus I and others are advocating that the federal constitution be amended to read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation.
Your record shows you sympathetic to the cause of marriage equality. You have earned a perfect positive rating from the Human Rights Campaign for each of the last three Congresses, and have voted consistently against the so-called "Marriage Protection Amendment" that would have nationally banned same-sex marriage. The fight for a Marriage Equality Amendment would obviously be long and fraught with political peril. It is the best means, however, to counteract the reprehensible tactics of those who would spread injustice and discrimination.
I have set out to write every member of Congress seeking a sponsor for this measure. Would you take up its cause, Congressman? I hope that you will see the justness of this reform and lend it your support among your colleagues in the House. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and extend my best wishes.
Sincerely,
Andrew Meyer
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Connecticut (II) Senator Joseph Lieberman
Today I continue with Senator Joseph Lieberman, the junior senator from Connecticut:
Dear Senator Lieberman,
I write to solicit your support for a Marriage Equality Amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the United States. Such an amendment would read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation." This change to our basic law is the surest and most durable means to both safeguarding the rights of our citizens and defending the institution of marriage itself.
In the past you have taken a "centrist" position on the issue of marriage equality. On the one-hand you have opposed the legalization of same-sex marriage, on the other you have opposed measures like the so-called "Federal Marriage Amendment" that would have comprehensively denied marriage rights to same-sex couples. In registering your opposition to that amendment, you stated:
"Gay couples exist. They also enjoy the rights promised in the Declaration that are the endowments of our Creator. They are not going away. To say that these couples and their children should be denied any legal protections – or relieved of all legal responsibilities – would be unfair.
Dear Senator Lieberman,
I write to solicit your support for a Marriage Equality Amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the United States. Such an amendment would read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation." This change to our basic law is the surest and most durable means to both safeguarding the rights of our citizens and defending the institution of marriage itself.
In the past you have taken a "centrist" position on the issue of marriage equality. On the one-hand you have opposed the legalization of same-sex marriage, on the other you have opposed measures like the so-called "Federal Marriage Amendment" that would have comprehensively denied marriage rights to same-sex couples. In registering your opposition to that amendment, you stated:
"Gay couples exist. They also enjoy the rights promised in the Declaration that are the endowments of our Creator. They are not going away. To say that these couples and their children should be denied any legal protections – or relieved of all legal responsibilities – would be unfair.
I presume that most all of us would agree, for example, that someone should not be excluded from his dying life partner’s hospital room on the ground that their decades-long relationship had no legal status. Probably many of us who have thought about it would not want to see someone who raised her partner’s biological child as her own and provided the family’s principal means of support be able to simply walk away without any financial obligations to the child if the couple ends their relationship.
I do not profess to know now exactly how and in what form these rights and responsibilities should be extended to gay couples. Different States are already providing different answers to those difficult questions. But I do know that this is a discussion and a debate that will and should continue."
The basic principles of fairness you outlined here make the passage of a Marriage Equality Amendment imperative, Senator. Experience shows that creating a "second track" system of civil unions will not guarantee same-sex couples the rights and responsibilities that are inherently their due. Marriage only works to protect couples' ties and obligations to one-another because it is universally recognized as the closest of kinship relationships, one that trumps natal family bonds because it is freely chosen. Unless and until our institutions fully recognize the binding force of the family ties same-sex partners form with one-another their unions will not afford them "equal protection of the law," thus consigning them to second-class citizenship. Such a condition of apartheid rebels against the founding spirit and basic values of our Republic. This was the logic that drove the Vermont legislature to so wisely convert from a system of civil unions to full marriage equality.
Moreover, the current state of our laws does injury to the institution of marriage itself. Historically, marriage has been among the most stable and powerful foundations of our civil society because it was universally portable and binding. The patchwork of conflicting legalities that has emerged as individual states negotiate the question of marriage equality has led to an unprecedented state of affairs. It is now possible for the marital status of a couple to alter by degrees as they travel from state to state. Such a condition was rare even for interracial couples during the days of so-called "anti-miscegenation laws," but is becoming ever more frequent in this new stage of the struggle for marriage equality. Until a uniform national policy is adopted, as was done in the case of Loving v. Virginia, the marital bond will be subjected to progressive fragmentation.
I have set out to write every member of Congress seeking support for a Marriage Equality Amendment. My letters are being collected at a weblog: http://marriageequalityamendment.blogspot.com/. Your career demonstrates that you are a person of principle, one who will follow his own conscience even against the consensus of his party or the interests of his own political career. I hope that on searching your conscience you will recognize the justness of this cause and lend it your considerable authority. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and extend my best wishes.
Sincerely,
Andrew Meyer
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Connecticut (I) Senator Chris Dodd
Today I begin corresponding with Connecticut's Congressional delegation with Senator Chris Dodd, senior senator from that state:
Dear Senator Dodd,
I write soliciting your support for a Marriage Equality amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the United States. Such an amendment would read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation." Your record regarding marriage equality has been somewhat ambivalent, Senator. During your recent presidential campaign you spoke out in favor of "civil unions," noting that you would want some guarantees of your young daughters' rights should they grow up to be of a different sexual orientation from their parents. But you have consistently opposed full marriage equality for same-sex couples, casting a vote in favor of the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act" in 1996.
Creating a separate institution for same-sex couples will not help your daughters or any of the millions of Americans that are arbitrarily and unjustly excluded from the marriage bond, however. As was proven during the Civil Rights Movement of the '50's and '60's and has been demonstrated by hard experience ever since, separate is never equal. The full range of protections and guarantees flowing from marriage (1, 138 of them under federal law, according to the Government Accountability Office) can never be engineered into a novel institution. Even if they were, the patchwork of divergent terms and conventions adopted by the individual states guarantees that "civil unions" and "domestic partnerships" will never possess the same portability and legal force of marriage, consigning all couples restricted to such arrangements to perpetual second-class citizenship. Is this what you would wish upon your daughters, Senator?
Marriage is among the most fundamental and definitive social acts a citizen may undertake; it is the one kinship relationship that we may freely choose. Denial of the right to marry the consenting partner of one's choice thus amounts to nothing less than an assault upon an individual's capacity for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." In casting your vote against the so-called "Marriage Protection Amendment" you noted that though there have been over 11,000 proposed amendments to our constitution, only 27 have been adopted. This, you observed, was because "our Nation's constitutional history clearly demonstrates that change to our Constitution is appropriate on only the rarest occasions--specifically, to correct problems in the government structure or to expand the category of individual rights."
The present need for full marriage equality is one of those "rarest occasions" on which Constitutional reform is necessary. Not only are millions of Americans systematically being denied their rights, but well-funded and highly energized groups are mobilized to deepen and expand the conditions of discrimination that currently prevail throughout most of the U.S. Aggressive action is needed if a fair and just society is ever to be achieved.
In closing I turn your own illustrative example upon you, Senator. If one of your two daughters does grow up to have a different sexual orientation, do you trust that the status quo would safeguard her dignity and afford her a fair and equal chance for happiness? If not, what type of change would give you peace of mind?
With this question in view, I have set out to write every member of Congress seeking support for a Marriage Equality Amendment. My letters are being collected on a weblog: http://marriageequalityamendment.blogspot.com/. I hope that you will be convinced of the justness and urgency of this campaign and will lend it your considerable authority. In any case, I thank you for your attention on this matter and for your service to our Nation, and hope this message finds you well.
Sincerely,
Andrew Meyer
Dear Senator Dodd,
I write soliciting your support for a Marriage Equality amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the United States. Such an amendment would read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation." Your record regarding marriage equality has been somewhat ambivalent, Senator. During your recent presidential campaign you spoke out in favor of "civil unions," noting that you would want some guarantees of your young daughters' rights should they grow up to be of a different sexual orientation from their parents. But you have consistently opposed full marriage equality for same-sex couples, casting a vote in favor of the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act" in 1996.
Creating a separate institution for same-sex couples will not help your daughters or any of the millions of Americans that are arbitrarily and unjustly excluded from the marriage bond, however. As was proven during the Civil Rights Movement of the '50's and '60's and has been demonstrated by hard experience ever since, separate is never equal. The full range of protections and guarantees flowing from marriage (1, 138 of them under federal law, according to the Government Accountability Office) can never be engineered into a novel institution. Even if they were, the patchwork of divergent terms and conventions adopted by the individual states guarantees that "civil unions" and "domestic partnerships" will never possess the same portability and legal force of marriage, consigning all couples restricted to such arrangements to perpetual second-class citizenship. Is this what you would wish upon your daughters, Senator?
Marriage is among the most fundamental and definitive social acts a citizen may undertake; it is the one kinship relationship that we may freely choose. Denial of the right to marry the consenting partner of one's choice thus amounts to nothing less than an assault upon an individual's capacity for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." In casting your vote against the so-called "Marriage Protection Amendment" you noted that though there have been over 11,000 proposed amendments to our constitution, only 27 have been adopted. This, you observed, was because "our Nation's constitutional history clearly demonstrates that change to our Constitution is appropriate on only the rarest occasions--specifically, to correct problems in the government structure or to expand the category of individual rights."
The present need for full marriage equality is one of those "rarest occasions" on which Constitutional reform is necessary. Not only are millions of Americans systematically being denied their rights, but well-funded and highly energized groups are mobilized to deepen and expand the conditions of discrimination that currently prevail throughout most of the U.S. Aggressive action is needed if a fair and just society is ever to be achieved.
In closing I turn your own illustrative example upon you, Senator. If one of your two daughters does grow up to have a different sexual orientation, do you trust that the status quo would safeguard her dignity and afford her a fair and equal chance for happiness? If not, what type of change would give you peace of mind?
With this question in view, I have set out to write every member of Congress seeking support for a Marriage Equality Amendment. My letters are being collected on a weblog: http://marriageequalityamendment.blogspot.com/. I hope that you will be convinced of the justness and urgency of this campaign and will lend it your considerable authority. In any case, I thank you for your attention on this matter and for your service to our Nation, and hope this message finds you well.
Sincerely,
Andrew Meyer
Friday, April 3, 2009
Colorado (IX) Congressman Ed Perlmutter
Today I conclude my correspondence with Colorado's Congressional delegation with Congressman Ed Perlmutter, Democrat, representative of Colorado's 7th Congressional District:
Dear Congressman Perlmutter,
I write seeking your support for a Marriage Equality Amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples throughout the United States to marry. Your record shows you sympathetic to the cause of marriage equality. As a state senator in Colorado you supported legislation granting spousal rights to same-sex partners, declaring: "It is without reservation that I am proud to endorse the Colorado Domestic Partnership Benefits and Responsibilities Act. My friends in the GLBT community deserve the dignity to be able to make their own decisions concerning matters such as hospital visitation, inheritance, health care decisions, and end-of-life decision." Despite this stance, however, you have declared yourself opposed to the recognition of full marriage equality. It is my hope that you may be persuaded to change your position on this issue.
Experience shows that separate is never equal. Married status affords citizens 1,138 benefits and protections under federal law. That full range of safeguards cannot be engineered into a "second track" institution reserved for same-sex couples, nor should such a feat be attempted. Please do not be taken in by those who would confuse the religious and civil institutions of marriage. If you are genuinely concerned for the dignity of friends and compatriots in the GLBT community you should not desire them to be relegated to the status of second-class citizens. Forming kinship ties and building a family with the partner of one's choice is indispensible to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Marriage Equality is thus a right that cannot be denied to any citizen, even by a vote of the majority. If our Republic is to remain true to the principles of its founding mandate, the institution of civil marriage cannot arbitrarily exclude millions of Americans.
Until rights of marriage are federally protected for all citizens, the forces of intolerance and injustice will continue to spread discriminatory measures like Proposition 8 in California. The surest and most durable way to bring our laws into alignment with the basic rights of our citizens is to amend the U.S. Constitution to read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied on account of sex or sexual orientation." I have set out to write every member of Congress soliciting support for such a reform.
I hope that you see the justice of this campaign and will lend the amendment your support. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and extend my best wishes.
Sincerely,
Andrew Meyer
Dear Congressman Perlmutter,
I write seeking your support for a Marriage Equality Amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples throughout the United States to marry. Your record shows you sympathetic to the cause of marriage equality. As a state senator in Colorado you supported legislation granting spousal rights to same-sex partners, declaring: "It is without reservation that I am proud to endorse the Colorado Domestic Partnership Benefits and Responsibilities Act. My friends in the GLBT community deserve the dignity to be able to make their own decisions concerning matters such as hospital visitation, inheritance, health care decisions, and end-of-life decision." Despite this stance, however, you have declared yourself opposed to the recognition of full marriage equality. It is my hope that you may be persuaded to change your position on this issue.
Experience shows that separate is never equal. Married status affords citizens 1,138 benefits and protections under federal law. That full range of safeguards cannot be engineered into a "second track" institution reserved for same-sex couples, nor should such a feat be attempted. Please do not be taken in by those who would confuse the religious and civil institutions of marriage. If you are genuinely concerned for the dignity of friends and compatriots in the GLBT community you should not desire them to be relegated to the status of second-class citizens. Forming kinship ties and building a family with the partner of one's choice is indispensible to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Marriage Equality is thus a right that cannot be denied to any citizen, even by a vote of the majority. If our Republic is to remain true to the principles of its founding mandate, the institution of civil marriage cannot arbitrarily exclude millions of Americans.
Until rights of marriage are federally protected for all citizens, the forces of intolerance and injustice will continue to spread discriminatory measures like Proposition 8 in California. The surest and most durable way to bring our laws into alignment with the basic rights of our citizens is to amend the U.S. Constitution to read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied on account of sex or sexual orientation." I have set out to write every member of Congress soliciting support for such a reform.
I hope that you see the justice of this campaign and will lend the amendment your support. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and extend my best wishes.
Sincerely,
Andrew Meyer
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Colorado (VIII) Congressman Mike Coffman
Today I continue with Congressman Mike Coffman, Republican, representative of Colorado's 6th Congressional District:
Dear Congressman Coffman,
I write seeking your support for a Marriage Equality Amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the nation. Such an amendment would read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation." As a newly elected Republican representative you will no doubt be under pressure from your party to support policies diametrically opposed to such a reform. Moreover, your campaign website records your promise to "promote pro-life and pro-family values," which is rhetoric that has typically been associated with the fight against marriage equality. You portrayed yourself as a Republican "maverick" who cherishes independence of thought, however. I thus appeal to that professed independence in urging you to cross party lines in defense of your fellow citizens' rights.
As a Marine Major, you led soldiers in combat in both the first Gulf War and Iraq. You thus know firsthand the nature of individual sacrifice in support of our common values. What value is more fundamental to the American spirit than the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?" And what is more essential to those blessings than the freedom to form families with those we love and cherish? Marriage equality is at the heart of the creed for which you risked your life. As long as millions of Americans are arbitrarily and unjustly denied the 1,138 benefits and protections that flow to married couples under federal law, a state of apartheid will persist in our country that violates the founding spirit of our Republic for which you fought.
I hope that you may be persuaded of the justness and urgency of this campaign. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and your service to our country, and extend my best wishes for success in your new office.
Sincerely,
Andrew Meyer
Dear Congressman Coffman,
I write seeking your support for a Marriage Equality Amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the nation. Such an amendment would read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation." As a newly elected Republican representative you will no doubt be under pressure from your party to support policies diametrically opposed to such a reform. Moreover, your campaign website records your promise to "promote pro-life and pro-family values," which is rhetoric that has typically been associated with the fight against marriage equality. You portrayed yourself as a Republican "maverick" who cherishes independence of thought, however. I thus appeal to that professed independence in urging you to cross party lines in defense of your fellow citizens' rights.
As a Marine Major, you led soldiers in combat in both the first Gulf War and Iraq. You thus know firsthand the nature of individual sacrifice in support of our common values. What value is more fundamental to the American spirit than the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?" And what is more essential to those blessings than the freedom to form families with those we love and cherish? Marriage equality is at the heart of the creed for which you risked your life. As long as millions of Americans are arbitrarily and unjustly denied the 1,138 benefits and protections that flow to married couples under federal law, a state of apartheid will persist in our country that violates the founding spirit of our Republic for which you fought.
I hope that you may be persuaded of the justness and urgency of this campaign. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and your service to our country, and extend my best wishes for success in your new office.
Sincerely,
Andrew Meyer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.png)
