Support marriage amendment

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reba

Reba

Retired Terp
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
54,903
Reaction score
1,518
TOPIC:

S. J. RES. 30
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

`Article--

`SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

`This Article may be cited as the `Federal Marriage Amendment'.

`SECTION 2. MARRIAGE AMENDMENT.

`Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.'.

ACTION:
Pray, spread the word, contact your Senator, and sign the petition.
http://www.protectmarriagerally.com/default.asp#sj30
 
:thumbd: im disgusted with the Bush Administration mixing church and state and besides the amendment is a blatant attempt at discrimination by the stupid Bush Administration -- i think Bush is :crazy: hes NUTS!

Bush :rl:
 
LIKE HELL I will NOT vote for that We have our rights and if u dont like it tuff this is discrimatory Screw that!
 
I WILL NOT support such an amendment. I think people who supports this amendment are asses, thinking that homosexual unions would threaten the concept of marriage. Marriage is mostly a business contract between two couples anyhow.

Although this may be your opinion, Reba, to agree with this amendment, I think it is the opinion of an older generation to be against same-sex unions. Whose business is it for a regular citizen to meddle in other people's marriages?
 
I will never support this amendment, period. It is my personal opinion that this is very, very unrealistic and people who support this amendment are desperately grasping at a very old perception that is not just working anymore. Period. :)
 
kuifje75 said:
I WILL NOT support such an amendment. I think people who supports this amendment are asses, thinking that homosexual unions would threaten the concept of marriage. Marriage is mostly a business contract between two couples anyhow.

Although this may be your opinion, Reba, to agree with this amendment, I think it is the opinion of an older generation to be against same-sex unions. Whose business is it for a regular citizen to meddle in other people's marriages?
Click to expand...

:applause: bootifully said Kuifje!! :thumb:
 
hmmm....

I wouldn't go around calling people names whoever support this....Everyone see things different in life, but don't let them stop you from living your life the way you want.... ;)

Before anyone jump on me, I'm not saying I support this....*holding up a peace sign*
 
Bush and others who think that gay marriage would threaten other marriages are :crazy:. It would be like thinking that interracial marriages would hurt marriages between white people and banning them. :crazy:

RedFox
 
The next thing you know, common law will be illegal.
And guess who will be sticking the nose into it?
What do you think will happen to the children of an illegal contract?
Who are we gonna have to bootlick?
When are we the people gonna let the government know that they work for US???
 
RedFox said:
It would be like thinking that interracial marriages would hurt marriages between white people and banning them. :crazy:
Click to expand...
There is no analogy between same-sex "marriage" and interacial marriage whatsoever.
 
Beowulf said:
The next thing you know, common law will be illegal.
Click to expand...
Are you referring to common-law marriages? They are only legal in a few places now. I happen to live in one of the few states where it is still legal. This amendment has nothing to do with that.

What do you think will happen to the children of an illegal contract?
Click to expand...
Well, what do you think will happen? What do you mean?

When are we the people gonna let the government know that they work for US???
Click to expand...
"US" includes people who support the amendment.
 
I guess you're right, Reba...
Democracy is really two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner...

And as to the rest of your questions, I suddenly feel a deep weariness.
Are you Howard Stern? May I have your autograph?
hee hee
 
Last edited:
Reba said:
This amendment has nothing to do with that.
Click to expand...

Actually, you are incorrect. According to Utah's referendum, if people vote on the second part to recognise only traditional marriages, all common-law marriages and domestic partnerships between heterosexual and homosexual couples will no longer be recognised.

Does the proposed amendment only affect same-sex couples and relationships?

NO. The wording of Part 2 of the proposed amendment is so vague and overly broad that it prohibits Utah from ever recognizing common law marriages or domestic partnerships between straight couples from other states. This proposed amendment is not just about defining marriage or prohibiting recognition of same-sex relationships, it impacts the lives of all Utahns—gay or straight.
Click to expand...

From: http://www.dontamendalliance.com/site/PageServer?pagename=faq_main
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This would eliminate Vermont's Civil Union bill and the future that ANY states have to institute a similar bill. This could also leave the door open to the abolition of domestic partner benefits in the future.
Click to expand...
From: http://www.petitiononline.com/0712t001/petition.html

Why is it so important to defeat FMA?
First, FMA is unnecessary. Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996 which defines marriage between a man and a woman. Therefore, there is no need to pass FMA and amend the Constitution to do the same thing.

Second, the Constitution has only been amended 17 times in the past 214 years and only to expand rights to citizens not to take them away as FMA would do.

Clearly, FMA is an unnecessary distraction from the real issues facing this country such as the millions of jobs lost and shipped overseas and the lack of health care.
Click to expand...
From: http://www.campaigntoprotect.org/dontchange/learnmore.html
 
Reba said:
There is no analogy between same-sex "marriage" and interacial marriage whatsoever.
Click to expand...

There're no analogies between the marriages themselves, the analogy is in the attitudes that people had towards them.

RedFox
 
^Angel^ said:
hmmm....

I wouldn't go around calling people names whoever support this....Everyone see things different in life, but don't let them stop you from living your life the way you want.... ;)

Before anyone jump on me, I'm not saying I support this....*holding up a peace sign*
Click to expand...

I see what you were referring to, Angel. LOL. Kootchie's post?
*slaps Kootchie* ;)

Of course. That won't stop anyone from sharing their opinions even if it is to disagree with another. In a dirty way, I agree with Kootchie-- so I deserve to be slapped, too. I guess it does truly bother me about the idea of some people being close minded out there (IMO) based on what I feel to be right. Can't help feeling the way we do, right? Hey, the love is still there.

It's cool watching this discussion, though even if I disagree with the person's opinions starting this thread. :)
 
Last edited:
Liza said:
I see what you were referring to, Angel. LOL. Kootchie's post?
*slaps Kootchie* ;)

Of course. That won't stop anyone from sharing their opinions even if it is to disagree with another. In a dirty way, I agree with Kootchie-- so I deserve to be slapped, too. I guess it does truly bother me about the idea of some people being close minded out there (IMO) based on what I feel to be right. Can't help feeling the way we do, right? Hey, the love is still there.

It's cool watching this discussion, though even if I disagree with the person's opinions starting this thread. :)
Click to expand...

:giggle: ...It's ok, I didn't want to point fingers at anyone, but however I do know how you both feel, I used to call Bush names, or other things I do not find is fair but life is not always fair....Roadierunner taught me alot of things by saying ' Don't let things get the best of you, no matter what makes you angry, frustrated or even feeling hurt by the things others may say or do... Enjoy your life to the best of your capabilities '..... :thumb: ...

Our government may run our country but they can't stop us from living our lives the way we see fit and be happy with what you have now....I enjoy life as it is now! :) ..

:ily:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top