This issue isn't just about protecting marriage...it's about protecting the Constitution
DEFEND IT...DON'T AMEND IT!
Conservatives do NOT have to support "gay marriage" in order to oppose this constitutional amendment nationalizing marriage laws. Indeed, true limited-government conservatives should be appalled at the very notion of tinkering with our founding document in this manner.
It is thoroughly inconsistent for conservatives to argue that individual states should not be forced to recognize a “gay marriage” from other states, but that via a constitutional amendment every state should be forced to prohibit "gay marriages” - even if the citizens of a specific state wish to recognize them. As conservatives we're supposed to favor states rights over federal dictates.
The last time people tried messing with the Constitition to promote a social issue such as this, it was called Prohibition. It didn't work then...and it won't work now.
Click HERE to read Chuck Muth's March 4, 2004, testimony before the U.S. Senate sub-committee on the Constitution.
Click HERE for a brief history of the Prohibition movement and its parallels to the Federal Marriage Amendment.
Click HERE to read Chuck Muth's "Top Ten Reasons for Conservatives to Oppose the Federal Marriage Amendment" and HERE for "Marriage On the Rocks"
Click HERE to read former Rep. Bob Barr's (author of the Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA) opposition to a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marrige.
Click HERE to read the full transcript of the majority opinion of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, as well as the dissenting opinions.
Click HERE for an op/ed by Deroy Murdock which reveals the real Ronald Reagan and his record on homosexuality and AIDS. Would he be in favor of a Federal Marriage Amendment? Not likely, if his past is any guide.