Replies

Here's my email to Senators Durbin and Fitzgerald:

Dear Senator Durbin/Fitzgerald,

I feel strongly you should vote in favor of the Marriage Amendment, which restricts marriage to only a man and a woman.

Despite arguments that this is a civil rights issue, it is not. Marriage has been defined as between a man and a woman for thousands of years and is thus defined in every dictionary you may pick. Marriage is a religious institution that the state has supported through benefits because of its good effect upon society. Married people live longer, are more prosperous, and happier. Married people are less likely to commit crimes than single people, especially single men.

There is no such thing as a homosexual marriage. That would require a church to create such a thing as a doctrine. Then the state would have to recognize it as equivalent as a heterosexual marriage. That would require passing a law.

The Massachusetts Supreme Court created law by fiat by ignoring the plain meaning of their own state constitution. Massachusetts has one of the oldest constitutions in the US and no court has seen a "right" to homosexual marriage until this one. The people of Massachusetts have the authority to create a law recognizing homosexual marriage--the court does not.

Homosexual advocacy groups will seek to use the Full Faith and Commerce clause to make homosexual marriage recognized across the United States. The defense of marriage act does not intervene in states rights--they can still create their own laws. It merely restores the universally understood meaning of marriage before the abhorrent decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Court invented a new meaning.

I await your vote. I will work against your re-election if you vote against this amendment.

Sincerely,

Jeffry J. Smith