Replies

What about a new Federal Marriage
Amendment??

Several polls have demonstrated that
about 70% of Americans are opposed to
the impending judicial activism which
will dramatically redefine a social
structure that greatly predates the
adoption of our Constitution.

We have warnings stretching from Thomas
Jefferson to Justices Powell (1977) and
Rehnquist (1997) about the hazards of
an unfettered judiciary.

An important point is to protect our
right to self-government, and pre-
emptively tell the Courts to let us
continue to fight the "culture war" on
a level playing field.

If we win the culture war then a
Constitutional definition of marriage
is unnecessary. If we lose the culture
war, such a definition is useless (cf
Amendments 18 and 21).

And if we let the referees rig the game,
we will certainly lose.

So then, I propose a revised FMA for
scrutiny and feedback:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Section I
Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed
to require marriage to be recognized as anything
other than the union of a man and a woman; nor
shall this Constitution be construed to require
that the legal incidents of marriage be conferred
upon unmarried individuals, couples, or groups.

Section II
This amendment shall not limit the ability of any
State, or the Congress, to alter their definition
of marriage by legislation or amendment. However,
no Federal Court, nor any court of any State, shall
have the power to redefine marriage, nor the power
to force another branch of government to do so.

Section III
Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to
empower any court to extend changes of marriage law
from one State to another, or from any State to the
Federal government.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

I solicit your honest and candid reactions.

I request that you pay less attention to my
preface and more attention to the proposed
amendment language.

- Gordon