Skip to comments.Can a mandate that says that marriage shall be between one man and one woman be federalized?
Posted on 05/10/2012 4:27:36 PM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
If this mandate can be federalized, via a federal constitutional amendment that says that marriage shall only be between one man and one woman, then why did RNC head Reince Priebus say on Andrea Mitchell Reports the following:
"Governor Romney and the Republican Party have been pretty clear, marriage is between one man and one woman. We believe ultimately that you can't federalize that kind of mandate, which is why we believe that individual states can make that decision on their own."
If Romney had not signed the pledge some time back that called for a federal constitutional amendment that said that marriage shall be between one man and one woman, then he would not be the nominee right now.
Looks like Romney is trying to pivot on this and weasel his way out of the pledge that he signed.
Reince Priebus on Andrea Mitchell Reports
Why clutter up the supreme law of the land with with things like that? We already have dictionaries from a number of sources which spell out for the unlearned (or too learned) what words mean.
The definition of marriage is pretty well set and the whole world knows what it is.
Homosexual people can contractually arrange something akin to it among themselves (and they have always been able to). They just need to find a different word for it and stop trying to force society to call it something it ain't.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.