Tuesday, February 24, 2004

Federal Marriage Amendment

Old Post: A discussion of an alternative to the FMA starts here.

Well, it looks like the president didn't take my advice and address the root cause of the problem. Instead, he's supporting a Federal Marriage Amendment:
Today, I call upon the Congress to promptly pass and to send to the states for ratification an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of a man and woman as husband and wife.

The amendment should fully protect marriage, while leaving the state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage.

He hasn't said what exact wording he would want yet, at least that I could find. I'd like to see that before I comment too much. My preference would be something that prevented the courts from imposing gay marriage while still allowing the legislature to implement it if the people wanted, but from his statement above, it looks like he wants the actual definition of marriage within the amendment.

The irony is that gay and lesbian activists, attempting to circumvent popular will by seeking court action rather than the legislative process, may have managed to block their own path. Overturning a constitutional amendment will be a much more difficult undertaking than convincing a state legislature to redefine marriage to their liking.

Update: It looks like Captain's Quarters has a similar view.

New Post: More here.

No comments:

Post a Comment

I moderate comments on posts more than a week old. Your comment will appear immediately on new posts, or as soon as I get a chance to review it for older posts.