• If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Files spread between Dropbox, Google Drive, Gmail, Slack, and more? Dokkio, a new product from the PBworks team, integrates and organizes them for you. Try it for free today.



Page history last edited by PBworks 13 years, 5 months ago

February 24, 2004



I agree with the President on the need for a federal marriage amendment that defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman.


As I’ve said before, amending the U.S. Constitution may be the best and most reliable way to prevent a patchwork of inconsistent marriage laws between states and to guard against overreaching by the judicial branch.


Acts of lawlessness in San Francisco bring into even sharper focus the need to proceed with the process of amending the Constitution. I don’t think anyone ever imagined that we would have courts and local officials defining marriage in a way that has no historical precedent whatsoever, and claiming it’s been in the Constitution all along.


Of course, we must conduct this debate with decency, tolerance and respect for those with different opinions.


The definition of marriage is so fundamental to society that it should not be decided by one court in Massachusetts or by one mayor in San Francisco.


In America, the people should decide. In America, the people are fair and tolerant. Let the people decide.



Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.