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

To: Gelato
Listen again. He clearly states in the interview that he favors a constitutional amendment on marriage "that calls for leaving it up to the states."

With a provision that it need not be recognized by other states. That is a small federal government solution, and I think it makes a lot of sense. If you don't want gay marriages in your state, you should make that known in state elections. If you do want them, you should make that known too.

70 posted on 05/06/2007 5:13:31 PM PDT by TN4Liberty (Conservatives want to destroy terrorism. Liberals want to destroy conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: TN4Liberty
With a provision that it need not be recognized by other states. That is a small federal government solution, and I think it makes a lot of sense. If you don't want gay marriages in your state, you should make that known in state elections. If you do want them, you should make that known too.

Traditional marriage was understood as so vital to our national survival that the original Republicans named it alongside slavery as one of the two purposes of the Republican party.

That understanding then shaped the destiny of a number of new states admitted to the union. They were forced to outlaw polygamy as a condition for statehood, because anything contrary to traditional marriage would be a destructive force to society.

Thank goodness the federal government ended polygamy.

Now it's time to close the Pandora's box of extending marriage or marriage-like status to homosexuals or any other non-traditional group.

73 posted on 05/06/2007 5:43:24 PM PDT by Gelato (... a liberal is a liberal is a liberal ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | 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