At this point, there are easily 40 states that would pass the amendment defining a marriage as DOMA defined it. It could also become a litmus test and a nightmare for Democrats (and some Republicans in primaries) running for Congress, especially for the Senate, as well as for state legislatures and offices. Instead of playing catch-up and being defensive, Republicans can start playing from strength.
Now could also be the good time for other simple Amendments (and litmus tests for primaries and general state and national elections) : "English is a national language of the United States" and "clarification of the citizenship" clause in the Forteenth Amendment.
This will not lose non-social-conservatives from Republican party, it might even attract many non-socons to the party, as many people don't like this to be shoved into their face time and time again, and having their votes overturned by few people in judiciary or legislature. It's a winning issue for conservatives and the Republicans even in many "blue" states, much more sound and popular than failed liberal ERA amendment drive ever was. And it's the only way to both assure the permanent resolution (instead of unsuccessfully chasing it court by court, state by state) and tamp down the liberal judicial activism. For every action there is equal and opposite reaction.
In light of recent brazen decisions by judges in AZ on immigration SB1070 and in CA on Proposition 8 (and other less well known state issues), this will be a popular issue as THE solution - as people feel powerless and looking for a way to make their votes count - requiring the election of people who can make it poossible into the Senate and state legislatures.
Forgive me for failing to see anything “conservative” about shoving one’s personal moral views in every State’s face. I’m against same-sex marriage and would vote to preserve marriage’s proper definition in my state, but if the majority of another state’s taxpayers want to re-invent English and history, it’s their poison to drink.
OPPOSITION TO MARRIAGE AMENDMENT BASED ON HYPOCRISY AND CYNICISM
By Don Feder
The nation just witnessed the dreary spectacle of the most powerful deliberative body in the world weighing the most important social issue of our time – an amendment to the U.S. Constitution defending traditional marriage –in a debate dominated by hypocrisy, cynicism and a concerted effort at reality-avoidance.
Democrats – and half a dozen Republicans – wouldn’t even allow the amendment to come up for a vote. A move to cut off a filibuster (60 votes needed) failed 49 to 48.
“A vote for this amendment is a vote for bigotry,” slurred the senior Senator from Massachusetts. In so saying, Edward Kennedy labeled all 8 U.S. Catholic cardinals – leaders of his Church – bigots, not to mention that notorious hatemonger, Benedict XVI (who also opposes Brokeback Mountain marriages).
The party of perversion was in rare form. I mean perversion of the truth, not the other kind of perversion – which they also favor.
Howard Dean had a new scream: “Democrats are committed to fighting this hateful, divisive amendment.”
What about not allowing a brother and sister to marry, or a man to marry four women, or a teacher to marry her 13-year-old student, or a man to marry a horse – is that hateful and divisive too, Governor?
The party whose last president didn’t know what the meaning of “is” is, — the party that condoned Clinton’s perjury — mobilized its full armada of deceit, deception and slander to misrepresent an amendment which is the essence of simplicity.
In pushing the amendment, the president and Republican congressmen were “playing politics” (i.e., using an issue for political advantage) they whined, something Democrats would never dream of doing – except with Social Security, gun control, abortion, hate-crimes legislation and any other issue on which they decide to pander to part of their constituency.....
http://www.donfeder.com/articles/0606MPAvote.pdf
The only thing you can realistically do to restore the vote of the people is to repeal the 14th amendment. It is the 14th amendment that enabled the Federal court to deny the people the right to modify their constitution as to protect the definition of marriage, protect unborn human life, protect our right to choose who we do business with, protect our right to be treated equally by the government on the account of race.(affirmative action).
Given the way that the 14th Amendment has been worded, and the court has used it, we would require an amendment of infinite length to protect the infinite number of rights which the court could could uses the same amendment to usurp.
We are better of repealing the whole thing and replacing it with a simple Prohibition against Government discrimination on the account of race.