[ChicagoGuy]

"An amendment that simply reversed Lawrence would almost certainly not get the votes of 2/3 of the members of the Houses of Congress and of 3/4 of the states needed to be ratified." The fact that a different amendment would be difficult to pass doesn't make this one a wise one.

"But after Lawrence, any state that exercised that power would probably force all other states to recognize such marriages too." Actually, no. The Defense of Marriage act already took care of that. The amendment proposed above goes far beyond this and usurps the power of the states, tossing 200+ years of history out the window. No thanks.

[aristeides]

Do you think the Supreme Court that just handed down the Lawrence and Limon rulings is going to uphold the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act?

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

The amendment proposed above goes far beyond this and usurps the power of the states, tossing 200+ years of history out the window. No thanks.

So ChicagoGuy is out. We get it already. Yeah yeah, 200 years. I don't know if you've been following the news, but 200 years of State's Rights has been tossed out the window alot lately. We have a Supreme Court that is literally creating "rights" and text that simply did not appear, nor any rational Justice could prove was implied-by the US Constitution.

Precident is law, which is why their "ruling" is so important. Law is based on it now, so unless we impeach those members of the Supreme Court (not going to happen) a counter measure has to be establish or Gay Marriage is a done deal.

I think the American people would be better served by having this entire idiotic ruling reversed because alot more is affected than gay marriage by inventing this right to privacy canard. Santorum was 100% correct people, almost prophetic, and so many of you Libertarians that argued against his judicial point made fools of yourselves. The way Justice Kennedy ignorantly defended the majority decision (not citing text from the Constitution) he did exactly what Santorum predicted and effectively stopped any law against consentual sex between adult relatives, bigamy, polygamy, and prositution from being upheld as "Constitutional"

I agree that an amendment seems rash, but given the Judicial Activism of the Supreme Court of the United States of America, legislators aren't left with alot of options.

[Antoninus]

Actually, no. The Defense of Marriage act already took care of that.

You mean the DOMA that's currently under assault from homosexual lawsuits? All it will take is one SCOTUS decision to overturn DOMA. And we know what a bunch of heavy-handed no-good rogues those 6 have revealed themselves to be. I have no faith in them to uphold what the Federal Constitution actually says.

Time to exercise the only check the people have on this sort of extra-constitutional judicial fiat. Constitutional Marriage Amendment -- NOW!