Don't be too sure.
Posted on 07/08/2004 2:00:38 PM PDT by Happy2BMe
QUEERLY BELOVED
1.4 million petitions
to flood U.S. Senate
'Unless we protect and defend marriage in law, our nation will face grim social consequences'
Three organizations will team up tomorrow to deliver 1.4 million petitions supporting traditional marriage to the U.S. Senate.
According the a statement from the Center for Reclaiming America, representatives from that group, the American Family Association and the American Center for Law and Justice will hand over the petitions to a group of senators on Capitol Hill tomorrow morning.
The Senate is expected to vote on a constitutional amendment upholding marriage between one man and one woman the week of July 12.
"We are expecting a filibuster from the anti-marriage forces," said Dr. Gary Cass, the newly named executive director of the Center for Reclaiming America. "This will be a difficult fight. Only an overwhelming grass-roots response can save marriage as we know it. These 1.4 million petitions are solid evidence that Americans care about the defense of marriage."
To visually display the petition-signers' opposition to same-sex "marriage," the boxes of petitions will be stacked on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol before being delivered.
"Marriage is the essential building block of our society, and it is under grave attack now," said Dr. D. James Kennedy, founder and president of the Center for Reclaiming America. "It is unconscionable that so many in the U.S. Senate are unwilling, at a time when men are already marrying men in Massachusetts, to come to the defense of marriage.
"Marriage is the bedrock of any culture; it is what cements the social order. Unless we protect and defend marriage in law, our nation will face grim social consequences as marriage weakens and dies – a pattern already observed in the aftermath of the legalization of same-sex marriage in Scandinavia."
The constitutional marriage amendment must be approved by two-thirds of both the Senate and House, and then be ratified by three-quarters of the states.
1.4 million?
isnt that larger than the entire gay community????
Don't be too sure.
I hope something can stop this stuff.
The wedding pages in the Sunday Boston Globe have become a big joke.
To say that these pictures of the "happy couples" makes me uncomfortable would be an understatement.
___________________________________________
Pingin the mammas and the pappas for the babies and the kiddies.
First...somebody needs to remind homosexuals that they do have a right to privacy! meaning..i dont need or want to know your business.
Secondly.. somebody needs to sit them down and explain what tolerance is...and that in order to recieve it..maybe they should give it!
My signature is there, was encouraged to sign with a second group, but allowed as how I saw the dictum to "vote early and often" to be a Democrat thing.
Kerry/Edwards, if not in open support, seem very reluctant to speak ill of gay marriage. Wonder how many of Edwards' father's "mill worker" buddies are gung ho for gay marriage?
I see the democrat senators needing a political calculation.
If they vote against this, they will be assuming the wrath of the voters and giving an level one issue to their opponents.
HOWEVER
If they vote for this, the senators will only be passing the buck to the legislatures. They will have political cover by sending this to individual state legislatures to work this out.
We defend marriage, too!
Whoops ! Grabbed the wrong comment to reply to.
Homosexual Agenda Ping - I hope you all signed this petition. If you haven't there's still time.
let me know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.
We do not need an anti-gay marriage - we simply need NO government encouragement for perversion, laziness, or illegal activities.
How about simply enforcing our current laws, and if some fed wants to overthrow the states' laws concerning marriage ..... well, you know what the Second Amendment was written for, don't you?
Signed and sent, little jeremiah!
Beth
Now we'll see how many Congresscritters and Senators listen to their conservative constituents.
"Now we'll see how many Congresscritters and Senators listen to their conservative constituents."
Well, I can count on my Congressman but my Senator....he and I haven't agreed on anything yet. Maybe this time.
That motion pic is so funny and disgusting at the same time. Too bad it can't be used as a campaign ad.
I've been thinking about this quite a bit ever since this ammendment thing first came up. I don't think creating this ammendment will do anything to stop the root cause of the problem - judicial activisim. After this ammendment we'll need another ammendment to fix another mess created by some activist judge's ruling - and then another - and then another . . . .
What we really need is judicial reform. If any type of Constitutional ammendment needs to be championed it's one that severly limits the power of federal judges. I'm not in favor of the limited scope of the marraige ammendment. We need to do a thorough house cleaning of the Judicial Branch - if that means a Constituional ammendment to clarify the limited powers of the Judicial Branch - then go for it! Short of a wholesale Constitutional Convention (of which I am not opposed to) this would make the biggest impact on the unrestrained power of judges.
Duly Noted!
Disclaimer: 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.
