Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: pepsionice
The curious thing here...you can’t identify anything in the Constitution where Congress can manage or control marriage...except for possible the commerce clause (that’s the one that health care fell under).

I think the primary argument would come from Article 4 Section 1:

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

But then you have medical licenses and bar admissions...neither of which is recognized across state lins. And the state licenses marriages...they are not strictly a private contract between two (or more) people.

4 posted on 06/01/2012 2:59:49 AM PDT by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good-Pope Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: markomalley

The founders were some pretty sharp people, but who could have foreseen—after thousands of years of tradition—that an attack against the sanctity of marriage would ever come from a portion of the populace rumored to be no more than 2%,and that 98% of the remainder would be forced to accept a mental aberration as normal.

This isn’t about whacko’s who are in love with each other this is about scamming for monetary gains that are denied to people who engage in perversion.

Why do we have laws forbidding more than one wife when we are accepting homoexual perversion. Certainly more than one wife is more normal, than what this is proposing.


5 posted on 06/01/2012 3:55:24 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson