[aristeides]

You don't even have to be particularly opposed to gay marriage to support this amendment. If this amendment is ratified, it will serve as a rebuke to the Supreme Court for its high-handed Lawrence and Limon rulings, and may persuade that court to apply those rulings narrowly and to avoid similar such rulings in the future.

[longtermmemmory]

I agree. This is why I posted this. The homosexuals already have websites up and running to oppose this. The are urging people to defend the supreme court. ( a court they were condemning two weeks ago) Time to push back.

[goldstategop]

Yup. The amendment was NOT written to ban gay unions such as civil unions. If we insist on getting everything, like we do on abortion, we will get nothing. What the amendment does is simply to prohibit the courts from forcing the federal government and the states to adopt civil unions like the Vermont Supremes did in their masterful judicial coup d'etat. It leaves the decision on whether to permit such unions up to the elected representatives of the people. That is about the most we can hope for in this country is to make sure if nothing else, that the courts cannot usurp the role of elected officials in making judgments about the validity of one of mankind's more enduring social arrangements.