[ICX]

"Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any state, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidence thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman."

Are you f*cking kidding me? What the hell is the point of the amendment in that case?

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

"We're treating it like just another little old amendment," Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., said of the GOP demands for separate votes on each version. "This is an amendment that will be added to a document that is precious, that we treasure, that we ought to have respect for."

But if liberal judicial activists want to amend the same precious document, that's A-OK with him.

[San Jacinto]

The Amendment was intended to clarify that a same sex marriage valid in one state due to legislative act was not entitled to full faith and credit recognition in states which do not recognize such marriages.

The Pub's failure to agree to go with one version only probably gives the 'Rats the cover they were looking for. This is a shambles at this point.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

This is just the same smorgasbord of excuses we see at the state level too. They are not real complaints. They're just a revovling set of distractions. All this "we" talk by the very ones who do not want the people of this country to have a say in this matter is very interesting.

[WOSG]

Sounds obscure, but it is a narrow amendment that overturns the Mass case but otherwise gets out of the way.

Usual Keystone Cop GOP behavior to get divided and conquered. Problem is judicial activism is a nettlesome problem and this is an indirect solution, only there are many, so they cant get down to just one... Like trying to end malaria with an elephant gun.

[longtermmemmory]

It also keeps homosexual recreational sex partners out of the immigration rights and federal taxes.

[Hat-Trick]

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (search), R-Tenn., said there was "great interest" among Republicans for a simpler approach that would add only one line to the U.S. Constitution: "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman."

What an incredible leadership void we see personified in Frist. The language should have been nailed down, solid, with everybody onboard or not, months ago.

[ElkGroveDan]

This division on social issues is killing us. We have got to come together for the upcoming elections and for the good of the party. The intolerant Senators in the GOP need to put aside their anti-marriage bigotry until after we recapture more seats in the Congress and re-elect our President.

[pete anderson]

It has blown up in their face.