Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jwalsh07
Over 50 % of Massachusetts residents oppose homosexual marriage. Nothing mushy about it.

That's still not a measurement of how passionate that 50%+ is about it.

And a majority isn't ENOUGH for an Amendment. The framers made it delberately painfully difficult to amend the Constitution. You'd better have 75%+ of the country opposing something with 50%+ of that really passionate about it to get an amendment to block that. You don't have that now for FMA, and NEVER will.

And it depends on the precise details of the wording of the question.

Do a poll asking if women should have the right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, and you'll have 50%+ of the country supporting abortion.

Do a poll asking if women should be allowed to kill their unborn children and you'll have 50%+ of the country opposing abortion.

366 posted on 07/14/2004 3:53:12 PM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 359 | View Replies ]


To: Strategerist

#####And a majority isn't ENOUGH for an Amendment. The framers made it delberately painfully difficult to amend the Constitution#####


That was their intention, but they never envisioned a future in which imperialistic judges would take it upon themselves to amend the Constitution by decree.

For opponents of gay "marriage" to amend the Constitution, it would take a vote of two-thirds of both houses of Congress, and then ratification by the elected legislatures of three-fourths of the states. To accomplish that would require the support of a very large majority of the American people.

But for supporters of gay "marriage" to amend the Constitution, all they'll need is nine judges: The four Massachusetts judges who imposed gay "marriage" there and five U.S. Supreme Court justices to force it on the entire nation. They won't need a huge majority of the public, or even a majority at all. Just a modest sized minority in key places will be enough to secure the two judicial fiats needed to add a "right to gay marriage" to the Constitution by decree.


372 posted on 07/14/2004 4:04:15 PM PDT by puroresu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 366 | View Replies ]

To: Strategerist

40 states have laws or constitutional amendments limiting marriage to one man and one woman. That comes out to 80% with several more in the process of doing so. But what do they know? Strategerist says there is not a consensus for an amendment to define marriage as that of one man and one woman.


384 posted on 07/14/2004 4:30:49 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 366 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson