Metavid

Video archive of the US Congress

House Proceeding 07-18-06 on Jul 18th, 2006 :: 3:23:45 to 3:27:33
Total video length: 3 hours 31 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:144 Duration: 0:03:48 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Dave Weldon

3:21:22 to 3:23:45( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Dave Weldon

Dave Weldon

3:23:34 to 3:23:45( Edit History Discussion )

Dave Weldon: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, there have been a number of points made in this

Jerrold Nadler

3:23:45 to 3:23:55( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: debate today with doubtful validity. we're told we should pass this amendment to protect marriage, but against what threat? if henry and steve want to get married, maybe that's a good

Jerrold Nadler

3:23:45 to 3:27:33( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Jerrold Nadler

Jerrold Nadler

3:23:55 to 3:24:07( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: idea, maybe it's a bad idea, but it doesn't threaten the marriage of anyone else, of any man or whom would want to get married, doesn't affect them in any way. divorce is a threat. some of our

Jerrold Nadler

3:24:07 to 3:24:23( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: other threats are threats, but gay marriage is not a threat to a straight marriage. we are told we have to protect children, but children are already in the custody of straight people, of

Jerrold Nadler

3:24:23 to 3:24:36( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: gay people, of gay couples, of individuals. if we want to protect children, we should give a legal basis to the partnership of the two people who have custody of them . now, we're not saying

Jerrold Nadler

3:24:36 to 3:24:48( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: that it might not be a preferable -- to have a traditional custody arrangement, maybe it is, but this doesn't affect that in any way. nor do we say because we want to protect children that we

Jerrold Nadler

3:24:48 to 3:25:00( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: prohibit elderly couples from getting married or sterile couples from getting married because procreation is the purpose of marriage. so this is a red herring. we are told -- we heard a whole religious

Jerrold Nadler

3:25:00 to 3:25:12( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: discussion. the fact that churches can define marriage from -- the fact is churps can define -- churches can define marriage from their point of view any way they want. we're not telling

Jerrold Nadler

3:25:12 to 3:25:23( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: a church how to deliver a sacrament. we're talking about civil marriage. churches can do what they want and regard as married whom they want, but we're talking about what the government recognizes.

Jerrold Nadler

3:25:23 to 3:25:34( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: we're also told that this is to protect marriage but the amendment talks about not only marriage but the incidence thereof, so it would clearly prohibit specific rights that a state may choose

Jerrold Nadler

3:25:34 to 3:25:47( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: to give to a gay couple, a right of inheritance, a right of visitation when one is sick in the hospital. and why should we tell the states they cannot do that at their wisdom? we are

Jerrold Nadler

3:25:47 to 3:25:58( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: told always -- by the other side of the aisle, that we should protect the rights of states. but as i said a few moments ago, family law, marriage law, divorce law, visitation law, child

Jerrold Nadler

3:25:58 to 3:26:07( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: custody law has always been a matter for the states. why are we preempting all state laws? we are told we are preempting unelected judges, but this amendment is an amendment to the constitution

Jerrold Nadler

3:26:07 to 3:26:22( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: of the united states that would preempt not just judges elected or appointed, it would preempt the state legislative action, it would preempt action by the people in a referendum. that's

Jerrold Nadler

3:26:22 to 3:26:31( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: not democratic with a small d. this, mr. speaker, is a political stunt. it's a political stunt at the expense of a minority of an unpopular -- of an unpopular minority. that's all it is. we

Jerrold Nadler

3:26:31 to 3:26:45( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: know it's not going to pass and the senate already rejected it. so this is just a political stunt. i appeal to my colleagues, vote no on this amendment. leave family law where it always has been

Jerrold Nadler

3:26:45 to 3:26:56( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: with the states, and don't desecrate our constitution. don't desecrate our most sacred document in our civil religion by inserting into it an amendment to deny a basic right to an unpopular group

Jerrold Nadler

3:26:56 to 3:27:06( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: just because we want to make a political point at the expense of that unpopular group in an election year. and make no mistake, that is what this amendment is. that is all it is. it does not

Jerrold Nadler

3:27:06 to 3:27:17( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: protect marriage. it does not protect children. it just makes a political point at the expense of an unpopular group, and we should not desecrate our constitution by so doing. i thank you.

Jerrold Nadler

3:27:17 to 3:27:33( Edit History Discussion )

Jerrold Nadler: and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. kingston: mr. speaker, i rise to close. and i just want to split the time between mr. murphy

Jack Kingston

3:27:33 to 3:27:43( Edit History Discussion )

Jack Kingston: and mrs. musgrave. and mr. murphy, one minute, dr. murphy, excuse me. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania has one minute. mr. murphy: i thank the speaker and the members on

Personal tools

MetaVid is a non-profit project of UC Santa Cruz and the Sunlight Foundation. Learn more About MetaVid

The C-SPAN logo and other servicemarks that may be found in video content are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Metavid