Contact: Kevin McCoy Monday, West Virginia Family Foundation, 304-721-4636, wvff@wvfamily.org

CHARLESTON, WV, Jan. 31. 2011 /Standard Newswire/ -- A statewide family values group that authored the Marriage Protection Amendment introduced this month for the sixth straight year in the state Legislature says it will continue its push until voters are allowed the right to vote on the amendment. Senate Joint Resolution-5 and its companion bill House Joint Resolution-18 were introduced Jan. 13th. It reads as follows:

"Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its political subdivisions. This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for same-sex relationships to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities or effects of marriage."

Kevin McCoy, President of the West Virginia Family Foundation, stated, "The amendment has been held up in committee for the past five years by Democratic-controlled committee chairmen refusing to even allow the legislation to the floor for a full and fair vote. Democratic lawmakers must stop obstructing passage of this legislation and give people the right to vote on the definition of marriage as only between 'one man and one woman'," McCoy said.

McCoy added that the second sentence of the amendment is critical in order to protect the unique legal standing of the institution of marriage rather than just the legal use of the word "marriage."

He said another family values group's endorsement of a weaker alternative "does nothing but provide political cover for Democratic lawmakers who support homosexual activists' political agenda, and by dividing legislative and public support between two versions, makes it more likely the legislature will approve no amendment at all."

Senate Joint Resolution 14, introduced last year and endorsed by the Family Policy Council of West Virginia, the state affiliate of Focus on the Family, reads, "Only a union between one man and one woman is valid or recognized as marriage in West Virginia." McCoy labeled the shorter amendment a "homosexual civil unions amendment," saying its wording is such that it "would allow the legislature to create homosexual civil unions and domestic partnerships and force West Virginia taxpayers to pay for expensive spousal-type benefits for the homosexual partners of government employees."

"This misguided attempt at political compromise provides political cover for Democrats who oppose letting the people vote to actually protect marriage, allowing them to embrace a watered-down amendment that would virtually invite recognition of civil unions and other counterfeit relationships. Such halfway measures do not work, as was recently proved in California, where a similarly weak amendment led to full recognition of not only homosexual civil unions but so-called homosexual 'marriage' as well. West Virginia must avoid this slippery slope and enact a strong Marriage Protection Amendment now," McCoy said.

McCoy called on the Family Policy Council of West Virginia to drop its support of their amendment and instead support the authentic Marriage Protection Amendment. He said if pro-family organizations and citizens are united, the chances of passing the broader amendment will improve.

"Marriage is far too important to be subjected to political compromise. If enough West Virginians demand that their legislators support an amendment to protect the actual institution of marriage, not just the legal use of the word 'marriage' while allowing legal counterfeits under some other name, our state can join the 30 other states that have approved strong Marriage Protection Amendments. With God, all things are possible," McCoy concluded.