(2006-06-05) — A revised version of the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment, currently circulating among legal experts on Capitol Hill, would define marriage beyond the simple ‘union of a man and a woman.’

The revision comes in response to critics who have blasted an amendment backed by the Bush administration as “too narrow.”

That one, which the president will endorse in a speech today, simply says that states don’t have to recognize any ‘marriage’ performed in another state that is not between a man and a woman — thus banning marriage between homosexuals and among polygamists.

The new amendment builds on the text of the current one, stating: “Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.”

But it then goes on to say, “Marriage shall not be construed as a simple business contract, nor as a temporary bond until something better comes along. Marriage is not the result of a chemical reaction in the brain sparked by visual or physical stimuli.”

“Marriage in the United States shall consist in hard work, as a man and a woman, struggling against their own selfishness, shall submit to one another in love.”

“For the purposes of this amendment, love shall be defined as a self-sacrificial commitment in which one person lays down his life for the good of another, and in that submission, sacrifice and duty, finds true joy.”

“Marriage shall continue from the day of the wedding service, until the day that the body of at least one spouse assumes room temperature.”

“Marriage is further defined as a monogamous relationship between a man and a woman, each created in the image of God and made for each other. It is based on, and therefore anchored in, an eternal and transcendent pattern established before the foundation of the world.”

“As a result, true marriage is a bond between a man and a woman that is created and sustained by the one who gives life, who is love, and who upholds all things by His power.”

“Neither this Constitution, nor the Constitution of any State, shall be construed to alter any of this, no matter what legislators, judges or other persons may do.”

Similar ScrappleFace News:

• Judges Vie to Overturn MO Gay Marriage Ban
• Bush Said to Back Ban on ‘Same-Sex Eunuchs’
• NY Judge Bans Heterosexual Marriage
• Bush Backs Amendment Defining ‘Mayor’
• Kerry: Same-Sex Couples Solve Abortion Problem