[spikeytx86]

By acting like a "Divine King" I meant by legislating as if it is being ordered or blessed by god in someway. Not whether it would stand muster to our checks and balance system. And before anyone says anything I don't mean no one should legislate out of morality or religious beliefs, but it is quite another story if they think god has some how ordained them with the right to legislate on his behalf, not only is that blasphemous it is dangerous. That is what I meant by diving king.

[dpa5923]

Aside from the fact the federal government cannot pass amendments without the state, this proposed amendment is not about morality, it is about stopping the unelected courts from enforcing their percieved morality on the people of the state.

If the citizens of state X want to have homosexual marriages, this amendment would not stop them. But if judge y decides that homosexual marriage should be the law of the land regardless of the desires of the people, this amendment would stop him. Likewise, if the people in state x make homosexual marriage the law of thier state, this amendment would prevent an overzelous religious radical judge from overturning the will of the people in state x because of his percieved morality.

The amendment would protect the will of the people and the right of the state.