Skip to comments.
Sign this Marriage Amendment Petition Please (Gay Marrige)
one man one woman dot com (Jerry Falwell site) ^
Posted on 11/18/2003 12:28:19 PM PST by BSunday
Please click on this link and sign the petition for the constitutional amendment:
Fight the Heterophobics
TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Culture/Society; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: child; father; fma; gay; glsen; heterophobic; homosexual; marriageamendment; mother; pervert; recruiting; school; soddomy; sodomite
posted on 11/18/2003 12:28:20 PM PST
To: No King but Jesus
Please can you help me get the word out on this also?
posted on 11/18/2003 12:41:05 PM PST
(I'm not the bad guy)
posted on 11/18/2003 12:44:59 PM PST
("He who is always looking up seldom finds others' lost change...")
Comment #4 Removed by Moderator
Yeah, that'll help.
posted on 11/18/2003 12:56:08 PM PST
(Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary. You have the right to be wrong.)
Signed and listed e-mails to statewide homeschool groups.
This is a federal power grab. We should be pushing for the rights of states to decide this for themselves, per amendment 10.
posted on 11/18/2003 9:07:17 PM PST
It's not a federal power grab; an amendment is an explicit part of the Constitution that allows for changes on major issues. It isn't strictly a federal thing, because a large portion of the state legislatures have to approve an amendment, that's why there have been so few.
Just because the amendment process is Constitutionally valid, doesn't mean it's not a federal power grab. I consider other amendments federal power grabs as well. Community standards is the best way to deal with these issues.
posted on 11/18/2003 9:58:33 PM PST
We should be pushing for the rights of states to decide this for themselves, per amendment 10.
I signed it(without phone number)...more info than I would normally submit. The cause justifies it, though.
Signed and bump!
posted on 11/19/2003 10:55:05 AM PST
by Nowhere Man
("Laws are the spider webs through which the big bugs fly past and the little ones get caught.")
To: international american
*I signed it(without phone number)...more info than I would normally submit. The cause justifies it, though.*
posted on 11/19/2003 11:24:57 AM PST
("Close your ears to the whisperings of hell and bravely oppose its onslaughts." ---St Clare Assisi)
Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo., has introduced the Federal Marriage Amendment (H.J. Res. 56) as a proposed constitutional amendment, which will remove the definition of marriage from the reach of all legislatures and courts permanently.
This amendment simply states:
"Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union between a man and a woman. Neither this constitution or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups"
We are in the process of gathering ONE MILLION NAMES on a petition that we will submit to Congress and the President in support of the Federal Marriage Amendment. An amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress and a majority vote of three-fourths of the state legislatures (38 states) with no governors' signatures required.
This petition will be sent to the President, your U.S. Congressman and your two U.S. Senators. The petition states:
I am greatly concerned over recent Canadian and American liberal court rulings in favor of homosexual "marriage", the legalization of sodomy, and other actions damaging the traditional family.
As a voting taxpayer, I fully support Rep. Marilyn Musgraves's proposed Federal Marriage Amendment (H.J. Res. 56) and urge your unwavering support for this legislation.
posted on 11/19/2003 6:29:11 PM PST
("Veritas vos Liberabit")
I understand the sentiment, but this is an attack on federalism. As they say, bad facts make bad law, and the principles underlying this amendment will come back to haunt. I can just see a federal amendment some day telling the states that they cannot construe their own state constitutions to permit the carrying of concealed weapons.
posted on 11/19/2003 6:34:12 PM PST
You're probably right. I need to rethink the whole issue of state vs. federal, and whether the federal government has a "compelling interest" in the matter.
posted on 11/20/2003 5:43:10 AM PST
(I'm not the bad guy)
I'm going to have to pass on this one. I can't support what I don't feel is the proper way to deal with this issue.
To: Admin Moderator
Sir, would you please remove my thread ? Given further consideration, I'm not sure that I believe this is in the purview of the federal government.
posted on 11/20/2003 5:51:54 AM PST
(I'm not the bad guy)
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson