A constitutional amendment to permanently ban same-sex marriages was reintroduced on May 21 by a handful of members of the House of Representatives (three Republicans and three Democrats). The lead sponsor is Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colorado).

The full text of the proposed amendment, H.J. Res. 56, reads “Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution nor the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.”

Other sponsors include Republicans Jo Ann Davis of Virginia and David Vitter of Louisiana, and Democrats Ralph M. Hall of Texas, Collin C. Peterson of Minnesota and Mike McIntyre of North Carolina.

This is the third year in a row that the group has introduced the measure “to protect marriage,” though it has gone nowhere, partly because no Senator has ever introduced companion legislation (a constitutional amendment must be introduced as a joint resolution in both the House and the Senate). There are no federal marriage laws — traditionally it is an area of state jurisdiction in the U.S.

If passed, not only would the legislation permanently ban same-sex marriage, but it would also bar state and federal courts from hearing cases regarding marital benefits.

However, passage is not likely, as the number of original cosponsors is dwindling. Two conservative Democrats who had signed on in the past had their congressional district lines redrawn and lost to more moderate Republicans in the last election.

Groups such as Focus on the Family and its political arm, the Family Research Council, once showered introduction of the amendment with a media blitz. But now they are silent, perhaps acknowledging the futility of the measure.

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) alerted their members to the reintroduction and is urging the community to contact their congressional representatives in opposition to the proposal. “This amendment is divisive and discriminatory, and seeks to treat one group of citizens differently than everyone else. That’s just wrong,” said HRC’s executive director Elizabeth Birch.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sent a letter to each member of Congress on May 23, urging opposition to H.J. Res 56. The ACLU called the measure “extraordinarily harmful” on seven specific counts.

Among them is that it would invalidate domestic partnership laws in more than a hundred jurisdictions. “The amendment could prohibit state and local governments from making their own decisions on providing benefits to their own employee’s families,” wrote ACLU attorney Christopher Anders.

Meanwhile the issue of gay marriage continues to vigorously bubble throughout the nation. Texas Governor Rick Perry signed a state version of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) on May 27, making Texas the 37th state to prohibit gay marriage.

Nebraska has also amended its constitution to prohibit gay marriage. The ACLU filed suit on May 28 to overturn that change, saying it discriminates against gays and lesbians. The organization said it is seeking “nothing more — nothing less — than a level playing field” for all.

Catholic bishops in Massachusetts are weighing in with a letter to their priests to include in their church bulletin a statement supporting passage of that state’s DOMA, and ways that parishioners might contact their state representatives. The four bishops had largely avoided involvement in this political issue until now. The letter has drawn mixed reaction from within and outside of the church.