Federal Marriage Amendment...Senate to vote soon.

[iflitifloat]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 1:52pm

The U.S. Senate is expected to vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) as early Monday, July 12.

What's At Stake:

In 1973, Roe v. Wade constitutionally guaranteed that the right to privacy "is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy."  That same right to privacy is the basis of many of the most important legal decisions guaranteeing the civil rights of gay and lesbian Americans.
 
In Griswold v. Connecticut, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a state law that criminalized the use of birth control by married couples.  The court’s decision in this case became the basis for later decisions recognizing privacy rights, including Eisenstadt v. Baird, in which the court invalidated a law prohibiting the distribution of contraceptives to unmarried couples, and Roe v. Wade, in which the court recognized the right of a woman to make certain fundamental decisions affecting her destiny, including the right to choose to terminate a pregnancy. 

The Supreme Court reaffirmed these constitutional protections most recently in Lawrence v. Texas, striking down the Texas law making it a crime for individuals of the same sex to engage in certain intimate sexual contact.   In reaching its decision in Lawrence, the court relied on Griswold, Eisenstadt, and Roe itself in reaffirming that the Constitution protects individual’s decisions about marriage, having and raising children, and basic family relationships. 


These cases form a seamless web that underscores an individual’s right to freedom from government interference - be they gay or straight - in the most personal, private decisions.  Opposition to this amendment is essential because it is an effort to unravel these protections and to weaken the Constitution’s guarantees of equal protection of the law.

[sean martin]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 2:34pm

The administration can push this sucker as hard as they want, but it'll still get shot down as unconstitutional. You don't write discrimination into the Constitution, last time I checked.

'Sides, let's face it: this is a ploy to divert attention from Bush's miserable work on domestic and foreign affairs and the laughable "war on terror".

The Republicans, who supposedly come from a long line of adherants to the philosophy of "little government, out of its citizens' personal lives", should be ashamed of themselves.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 2:38pm

People disturb me

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 2:48pm

It's a hot button, never gonna happen issue to force the Democrats to take sides and vote one way or another. They know it will never pass the House, but they will be able to say "See, so and so is in FAVOR/AGAINST same sex marriage." I hate election year tactics.

Just get the MFer out of there and lets move on, shall we?

[son_of_a_gunn_25]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 2:50pm

Well to amend the US Constitution 3/4 of the states have to ratify it. Political leverage is all it is. Pure and simple.

[sean martin]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 2:56pm

The upside of this shill game is that, apparently, from the lack of response from the public in general, it's a non-issue.

I sometimes wonder if there's something in the air or the water inside Dupont Circle that makes these people so stupid.

[Matt_G]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 2:57pm

Honey, Dupont Circle has more fairies than Fantasyland.

[sean martin]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 3:05pm

And I say we out every single one of them. I used to be against the whole outing thing, but stuff like this has a way of changing my mind real quick.

[Matt_G]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 3:07pm

I've got to go to Dupont after work, so I'll start outing everyone than.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 3:08pm

a constitutional amendment cannot by it's very nature be unconstitutional as it would be, in fact, part of the constitution itself. hence, were such an amendment to pass the 2/3 vote in both houses of congress and were 3/4 of the states to ratify said amendment, no court in the land could strike it down and only another amendment passed through the same process could repeal it.

this mesage brought to you by schoolhouse rock and the committee to help enemies of bush sound resonably coherent despite themselves.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 3:14pm

But, the DOMA could finally get to the Supreme Court and be stricken. I'm sure there are appeals on it sitting on someone's desk, waiting to be canned once Osama is wheeled out on live television just weeks before the election.
yours in conspiracy.

[sean martin]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 3:41pm

>> a constitutional amendment cannot by it's very nature be unconstitutional as it would be, in fact, part of the constitution itself

My knowledge of history may be a little shaky, but what happened to the Prohibition Amendment? It was struck down, no?

[Plum]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 3:43pm

Thanks, papalovesmambo. You saved me a ramble on American Government 101. :)

In any case, this will never pass. No way. But just in case, I'd write letters to the editor, etc. about it. Updated On: 7/8/04 at 03:43 PM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 3:48pm

nope, repealed by the 21st amendment. which went through the same path as the 18th (prohibition). an amendment is untouchable save for another amendment.

[sean martin]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 4:32pm

Hey! I brought you cookies! Kosher ones, at that!

[Matt_G]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 4:34pm

I loved them! Of course I'm watching my carbs this week, so I only had one. I'll save the rest for special occasions, though.

[iflitifloat]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 4:39pm

I have rarely, if ever, agreed with papa on anything political, but I'll listen to what he has to say any and every day of the week. Why? Because, no matter how misguided his political reasoning and spin, he still knows what he thinks and believes and is willing to lay it out there with passion.

[BWayBoy88]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 4:45pm

Doesnt this amendment defeat the whole "All men are created equal and are entitled to life liberty and the persuit of happiness?"

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 4:46pm

Not if you are a bigot

[sean martin]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 4:47pm

Well, see, it just proves that some men are more equal than others. :)

[BWayBoy88]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 4:50pm

Bush is a Jack A**

[Matt_G]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 4:55pm

Funny how posts where someone fights back against papalovesmambo are deleted, when an entire thread where he fights with others is left standing. Hmmm....

[Craig]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 5:07pm

Posts from both parties were deleted.... As always, personal posts/conversations should be taken to PM.

[Matt_G]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 5:11pm

and attacks on others should be left on the boards?

[Broadwaybaby614]

Posted: 7/8/04 at 5:23pm

Of course not, but you know they will be...

Updated On: 7/8/04 at 05:23 PM