[AntiGuv]

In favor:

Allard
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Coleman ?
Cornyn
Domenici
Fitzgerald
Frist
Graham ?
Hutchison
Inhofe
McConnell
Miller (D)
Roberts
Santorum
Sessions
Shelby
Talent

Opposed:

Akaka
Boxer
Breaux
Chafee (R)
Corzine
Dodd
Durbin
Edwards
Feingold
Feinstein
Inouye
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Leahy
Murray
Snowe (R) ?
Stabenow
Wyden

Question marks indicate those whose comments have been ambiguous enough that I may've misinterpreted. McCain should probably be in the opposed camp based on his comments to the Washington Post.

[KQQL]

this don't look good for FMA..

Looks like most rats will oppose it for kerry's sake.

[KQQL]

"I will probably work to pass it, but there's about 10 percent of me saying, ‘Is this the correct approach? When you start amending the Constitution, I get a little bit nervous,' " Burns said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.


Burns expressed a similar view Wednesday on NBC's "Today," saying he was "very cool to the idea of an amendment."


Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., said he supports traditional marriage, but has misgivings about amending the Constitution.


http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/latest/index.php?display=2004/02/25/build/state/32-gaymarriage-burns.php

[Republican Red]

Did some research on my two GA Senators. I found this article today from the SouthernVoice.com.

Both U.S. senators from Georgia agree that marriage should be reserved for heterosexuals, but Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.) said he does not favor amending the Constitution.

“I believe that marriage should be a union between a man and a woman,” Miller said in a written statement. “It is premature to discuss constitutional amendments because no court has challenged the traditional definition of marriage.

“Besides that, I’m not much on constitutional amendments,” he said. “We have to be very careful and go slow when we talk about changing that sacred document.”

In an e-mail this week, Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) said he too believes marriage “should be between a man and a woman,” and touted his support for the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act, which he voted for in the U.S. House in 1996.

Chambliss did not respond to questions about whether he supported amending the Constitution.

I'd take Miller off the yes list and put Chambliss up with a question mark.

[puroresu]

I'm afraid the Senate will kill the Federal Marriage Amendment, with the 'Rats all claiming to support "states' rights" on the issue. Of course, the idea of states' rights being respected by the courts is a joke. Once one state allows "gay marriage", the other 49 will be brought into line via a federal judicial fiat.

A lot of us tried to warn people that this was coming when the idiotic and unconstitutional sodomy ruling was handed down last year.

Imposing "gay marriage" nationally won't even require using the Full Faith & Credit clause. The Supreme Court will use the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. The argument will be that "married" gays in Massachusetts (or whatever the first state is to get stuck with these "marriages") suffer discrimination if they can't seek career or educational opportunities in other states without losing their marital status to their "spouse".

The idea that a states' rights position on this issue could last for any length of time is nonsense. John Kerry and other lefties who are using the states' rights argument are lying through their teeth.

Of course, once the "landmark" Supreme Court decision nationalizing "gay marriage" comes down, it'll only be the beginning. There will still be many private clubs, churches, businesses, etc. who won't go along, so over time they'll be shut off from state contracts, barred from meeting in public buildings, stripped of tax exemptions....

Freedom is about to take a major blow, and federal power is about to expand exponentially.

[Right Wing Professor]

Hagel (RINO) and Nelson (D) of Nebraska are both against it.