[conservative blonde]

You only have to look at the history of abortion to see the relevancy of having a marriage amendment to the Constitution. If we had had a ban on abortion in the Constitution before 1973 those horrid men on the SC could not have made abortion legal. Same with gay marriage. If there is a ban in the Constitution some judge is not going to be able to come along and nullify marriage as being just between a man an a woman. Right now there are four states where judges have nullified amendments to state constitutions banning same sex marriage. You are right that God has sanctified marriage as between a man and a woman but the state can come along and make it very difficult to keep marriage that way in society. I for one don't want to leave my grandchildren the legacy of perversion.

[linda_22003]

The Constitution is supposed to be about government behavior, not personal behavior. The attempt to change/outlaw one form of personal behavior was thumpingly reversed in a little more than a decade. Why do you want to change the focus of the Constitution?

[genxer]

i am against abortion but you don't amend the constitution ever to take away rights.

[gidget7]

"If we had had a ban on abortion in the Constitution before 1973 those horrid men on the SC could not have made abortion legal. "

Exactly right, and lest we forget, if the Judges had been allowed to interpret law into being, we would still have slavery. Their decision, (attempt to legislate from the bench", was that states had to allow people to own slaves. The ruling was stopped by Lincoln, and the homosexual agenda needs to be stopped now.

[ChocChipCookie]

Once gay marriage is legal in this country, and I believe we're fighting a losing battle against it, it is only a matter of time before we also lose true freedom of religion. That is the Evil One's ultimate goal, courtesy of gays and lesbians.