WHY THE MARRIAGE AMENDMENT IS NECESSARY
By Christopher G. Adamo
Conservatives should not be fooled into accepting all the empty rhetoric about marriage being a “states’ rights” issue. Despite the fact that members of both parties attempted to hide behind this shallow excuse, and even Lynne Cheney, wife of Vise President Dick Cheney, was offering “states’ rights” rhetoric as her reason for oppose the amendment, this crucial decision for the future of America was, from the beginning, devoid of any element of the states’ rights issue.
Since its inception, the entire battle plan of same-sex “marriage” advocates has been to systematically remove the issue from the jurisdiction of the people, since the proponents of legalizing same-sex unions know all too well that such a proposal would never be accepted in any venue wherein the people have an actual say in the matter. In Hawaii, where the concept first gained a facade of legitimacy, it was the State Supreme Court which, in a blatant episode of judicial activism, initially asserted a “right” of same-sex couples to “marry.” But even in Hawaii, hardly a bastion of Conservatism, voters quickly overruled the Court by asserting their views at the ballot box.
Throughout the entire same-sex “marriage” debate, public sentiment has been consistently opposed, while the courts have sought to exercise their authority in an effort to forcibly change human nature. In Lawrence v. Texas (2002), the U.S. Supreme Court eradicated anti-sodomy laws in all fifty states, basing its decision not on any federal constitutional principle or American ideal, but, rather, on the warped philosophies of certain “progressive” European nations.
So, “states’ rights” issues having been trampled from the outset of the same-sex “marriage” debate, it is clear that those voicing “concerns” for the U.S. Constitution and the reserved powers of the states under the Constitution are, in reality, seeking only to cloud the issue or hide from it. Hardly an infringement of states’ rights, the Federal Marriage Amendment represented a valiant effort of the people to regain control of their nation’s destiny, not only for this generation, but for all future generations.
Another scheme by Liberal Leftist "Republicans" to flee from a Federal Marriage Amendment was their plan to leave a gaping hole in it by allowing “civil unions” among same-sex couples to be legally recognized on an equal par with traditional marriage. Clearly, such a provision would have negated the entirety of the amendment. Though the advocates of this effort contended that, only by this means, might they have garnered sufficient votes to achieve a majority in the Senate, their real intention was, once again, to avoid a true showdown as to which Senators were willing to uphold the values of traditional America, and which ones were not.
The purposes of bringing this issue to the political forefront at this time were twofold. First, marriage needs protection from the attacks being perpetrated against it by activist courts. Secondly, if the present Senate membership isn’t going to support such a principle, those members working against it needed to be identified.
Ultimately, however, this is not an issue wherein any “gray areas” exist. Therefore, those Senators who did not fight to preserve the heritage and morality of the country when it was being attacked on such a fundamental level, or who gave only tepid support for the cause in response to pressure from their constituents, should ever after be regarded as the enemies of such things.
Efforts to force the American people to accept the destruction of traditional marriage have been insidious and underhanded, and thus no single law from any state or group of states could be sufficient to stem this evil tide. What is needed is not merely a law, but a foundation for present and future law. And such a foundation can only be provided by a federal constitutional amendment -- and amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The alternative is an unending series of lawsuits, resulting at best in ambiguous and inconsistent rulings, which in the long run will slowly but steadily erode and destroy traditional morality.
America will thereby be systemically coerced, through the ponderous power of a corrupt and out-of-control judiciary, to embrace the unacceptable. This is a fight that must continue.
Morality, Decency, & Traditional American Family Values
Africa: Black Africa *
Africa: North Africa *
American Government 1
LINKS TO PARTICULAR ISSUES & SUBJECT MATTER CATEGORIES
TREATED IN THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, U.S.A.:
American Government 2 * American Government 3 * American Government 4
American Government 5 * American Politics * Anglosphere * Arabs
Arms Control & WMD * Aztlan Separatists * Big Government
Black Africa * Bureaucracy * Canada * China * Civil Liberties * Communism
Congress, U.S. * Conservative Groups * Conservative vs. Liberal
Constitutional Law * Counterterrorism * Criminal Justice * Disloyalty * Economy
Education * Elections, U.S. * Eminent Domain * Energy & Environment
English-Speaking World * Ethnicity & Race * Europe * Europe: Jews
Family Values * Far East * Fiscal Policy, U.S. * Foreign Aid, U.S. * France
Hispanic Separatism * Hispanic Treason * Human Health * Immigration
Infrastructure, U.S. * Intelligence, U.S. * Iran * Iraq * Islamic North Africa
Islamic Threat * Islamism * Israeli vs. Arabs * Jews & Anti-Semitism
Jihad & Jihadism * Jihad Manifesto I * Jihad Manifesto II * Judges, U.S. Federal
Judicial Appointments * Judiciary, American * Latin America * Latino Separatism
Latino Treason * Lebanon * Leftists/Liberals * Legal Issues
Local Government, U.S. * Marriage & Family * Media Political Bias
Middle East: Arabs * Middle East: Iran * Middle East: Iraq * Middle East: Israel
Middle East: Lebanon * Middle East: Syria * Middle East: Tunisia
Middle East: Turkey * Militant Islam * Military Defense * Military Justice
Military Weaponry * Modern Welfare State * Morality & Decency
National Identity * National Security * Natural Resources * News Media Bias
North Africa * Patriot Act, USA * Patriotism * Political Culture * Political Ideologies
Political Parties * Political Philosophy * Politics, American * Presidency, U.S.
Private Property * Property Rights * Public Assistance * Radical Islam
Religion & America * Rogue States & WMD * Russia * Science & Ethics
Sedition & Treason * Senate, U.S. * Social Welfare Policy * South Africa
State Government, U.S. * Subsaharan Africa * Subversion * Syria * Terrorism 1
Terrorism 2 * Treason & Sedition * Tunisia * Turkey * Ukraine
UnAmerican Activity * UN & Its Agencies * USA Patriot Act * U.S. Foreign Aid
U.S. Infrastructure * U.S. Intelligence * U.S. Senate * War & Peace
Welfare Policy * WMD & Arms Control
Africa: Black Africa *
Africa: North Africa *
American Government 1