Is this ok then?
What would the FMA do?
The Amendment ONLY bans activist judges...
A legitimate understanding of the Amendment hinges principally on one word, "construe", which one should assume was chosen specifically and intentionally I would disagree with any assessment suggesting a banning when the freedom of the legislature is maintained.
ARTICLESECTION 1. This article may be cited as the ‘Marriage Protection Amendment’.
SECTION 2. Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.’’.
CONSTRUE: To adduce or explain the meaning of; interpret...
The Amendment simply removes a judicial ability to construe any novel marital constructs e.g. two men, three women, a goat and a lounge singer, etcetera and leaves open the question(s) to be legislatively addressed ONLY at both federal and state levels...
The hyperbole and propaganda coming from the enraged leftists opposed to this amendment is frenzied and tin foil hatted -no doubt, WHEN it passes, be it sooner or later, leftist heads will explode scattering tin foil everywhere authentic freedom reins over social engineering leftists.
Is this ok then?