Enshrine what in law? The definition of marriage? The feds are trying to pervert the definition that has been in effect since the beginning of society and force this homosexualism b/s down our throats. If must be fought at ALL levels of government.
I wonder how Swanky feels about DOMA. Here we had a federal law protecting traditional marriage and yet did not violate any state’s laws. How about the Healthy Marriage Initiatives from the 90’s that benefitted us AND our government?
Then you add in the fact that for centuries all goverments have benefitted from healthy marriages and ask yourself how can anyone say the government should remain neutral? Or worse - as swanky did - claim they don’t care if two homo’s marry? That is political/economic/cultural suicide.
I guess the fact that libs are screwing up marriage laws now gives them the right to say the government should not ever have been involved.
Do we spike their methods and attacks (which is called progressivism) and educate people on proper role of govt (which we will always have to do if you want to keep the Constitution) or do we climb into their boat and talk about fidelity to the constitution sometimes and then be just as progressive sometimes?
If you say it's the latter by fighting at all levels of govt WITH The govt (DOMA, War on Drugs, etc), then how are you going to differentiate conservatism with liberalism when you educate people?
Thinking people will see right thru you that you're just as big govt as a liberal, you just use it differently than they do and in the end, the results are this election. Fewer people showed up to vote against the communist Obama vs a moderately maybe possibly pro-constitution republican Romney.
As for me, the answer is the former. On this issue, on the war on drugs, on all of it. The founder's libertarianism was right then and it's right now. Progressivism is progressivism and we've lost already if we fight against their agenda to destroy the constitution by destroying it ourselves.