Posted on 06/27/2013 11:20:17 AM PDT by DannyTN
A constitutional amendment restoring the Defense of Marriage Act, to be introduced by Rep. Tim Huelskamp, likely would reignite the debate over same-sex marriage. The Kansas Republican said he plans to introduce the Federal Marriage Amendment to restore DOMA, which was struck down by the Supreme Court this week.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
I think you are doing the math backwards. 13 states have legalized gay marriage. However, another 6 have legalized civil unions - this includes blue states like Hawaii an Illinois that would be very unlikely to pass a constitutional amendment. New Mexico has no position yet, leaving only 30 states that have banned gay marriage via statute on constitution.
Yep, will never happen. I don’t think we could have even gotten an amendment passed 10-15 years ago, when we had a larger majority on our side, simply because not enough states would ratify it.
SCOTUS Can. But keep in mind the history. California judges ruled a California defense of marriage act unconstitutional. That’s why California people voted in Prop 8. And once they did that, the California supreme court went along with it.
they couldn’t continue to claim it was unconstitutional when the people had just voted to change the constitution to make it constitutional.
And if you have the votes to change the constitution, you probably have the votes to impeach judges and justices if they get in your way.
Exactly. Do not heed the naysayers. This needs to become a national movement. Soon.
The task of keeping a convention’s agenda under control is in the hands of the Chairman.
Baloney. We didn't have opinion polls back then, but it was enormously popular.
Senate vote 65 t0 20. House vote 182 to 128. 46 of 48 states ratified it. Only two voted against it.
Now it wasn't too many years, obviously, before a whole lot of people changed their minds. But in 1918/19 the amendment was wildly popular or at least considered inevitable.
And it only takes 13 of the 99 state legislature houses to block ratification.
The most recent Constitutional Amendment adopted that was submitted to the states took over 200 years. There is no time limit here like the gloomy crowd who think in short time frames.
Yeah but the one before that (26th amendment) took less than 3.5 months. And the one before that took less than 1.5 years.
Not trying gets you nothing.
There are 12 states that have legalized homosexual marriage:
Connecticut
*Delaware
Iowa
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Minnesota
New Hampshire
New York
*Rhode Island
Vermont
Washington
There are 6 states that have civil unions but they* overlap with the homosexual marriage states:
Colorado
*Delaware
Hawaii
Illinois
New Jersey
*Rhode Island
There are 36 states that ban homosexual marriage. That leaves 2 states that have no ban or permit; New Jersey and New Mexico. NJ allows Civil Unions, NM does not.
I think the numbers are there for a Constitutional Amendment. The process itself would sober Americans up.
Mr. Shoop is not even accurate with his numbers. It’s not 30 states, it’s 36.
Same-sex marriage is banned by constitutional amendment or state law in: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
Updated yesterday by the Communist News Network
http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/28/us/same-sex-marriage-fast-facts
He’s wrong with the numbers. It’s 12 not 13.
It just depends if you now count California.
Yes, you are right on that. But here is where the grey area is. States like Hawaii and Illinois have banned gay marriage, but more recently allowed civil unions. So where do you expect them to line up now on a constitutional amendment?
Give it a year and it will be 20 or 25. It’s an issue on a roll, and most Americans find it very difficult to resist the pressure of public opinion, even when it is largely manufactured.
See Alexis de Tocqueville.
Brew a backlash.
‘Gay Marriage’ aka ‘Marriage Equality’ but actually Homosexual normalization was voted in a number of states that were asleep as many voters sat out the 2012 elections.
The faction that sat it out is the old dissatisfied Perot bloc of blue collared conservative independents that were repulsed by Romney and could not be compelled to vote against Obama because the alternative was also quite repulsive to them.
This Perot bloc analysis has been confirmed by a number of post-election reputable statistical surveys who performed regional analysis that pinpointed the demographics that played key parts in the outcome of 2012.
The way forward is to defeat Rove-like GOPe antagonists and to control the GOP with an articulate leader that will bring back the Perot bloc. Once the rank and file has been strengthened, then the battle can be waged to get the crucial 37 states on board with affirming marriage as between one man and one woman.
Voters are not opposed to allowing civil unions. Many court cases have affirmed that civil unions bestow on the parties all the rights and benefits of married couples. There is no reason to intrude upon the institution of marriage other than to set the stage for normalizing homosexuality in the society.
The bottom line is voters can be persuaded to allow civil unions but vote to defend the time honored definition of marriage.
With good leadership Americans can be persuaded to reject the homosexual advance. See Post #39.
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.