Feingold, Specter Clash Over Gay Marriage

I would be fairly surprised if they could get a 2/3 majority in the senate on this, but if it happens, it could well be the start of many other constitutional changes for the worse. Once you open the door to intolerance in a country built on rebellion and independence, everyone loses in the long run.

This issue is obviously a cynical use of this as an election-year cudgel. I cannot believe that anyone who believes in the Constitution would deface it by enshrining an amendment based on intolerance and ignorance.

Dr. Fierce is correct to be appalled that the proposed amendment would enshrine discriminatory practices into the Constitution. But let's not be naive. The Constitution hasn't always been a bastion of non-discrimination against minorities. Words penned by the founding fathers of this country left women of the voting rolls for 140 years! And while there was no specific words in the Constitution that specifically identified Blacks as not being equal citizens, their classification as property prior to emancipation and it's legacy had Blacks ruled by courts as having no Constitutional rights for almost 200 years.

What amazes me is actually the second clause of the amendment that bans states from recognizing marriages that run contrary to the Federal Constitution. It is true that a founding pillar of our Federalism (we never have lived in a Democracy in the US) is that the States are only free to set laws where the Federal government is either silent or has specifically deferred a matter to the States (think Roe v. Wade and abortion rights issues).

However, it has been a long held pillar of conservatism to preserve States Rights where ever and when ever possible and to avoid Federal government oversight. Are conservatives now for MORE Federal government that will deny States their right to govern themselves as provided by in the Constitution? The Red States are some of the fiercest fighters for States right, but they are now voting to take away their power to govern themselves.

The only people who support this amendment that are being true to their convictions are the Theocrats who want to turn the US into a government run by religious principles (think Iraq, Iran, Syria, Israel, Myanmar) or the Monarchists who'd enthrone the Bushes as a 21tst Century Dynasty and throw out this cumbersome Constitution all together. But by last count there were 55 Republicans, 44 Democrats, and 1 Independent and James Jeffords is clearly neither a theocrat or a monarchist. That's how whacked this debate is 55 Republicans are trying to do away with rights their party holds very dear.