Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this constitution or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.My first question on this issue is, "Why do we need to outlaw gay marriage?" I don't understand how two men, or two women expressing their love for one-another in a marriage ceremony really effects anyone else. I don't understand the problem that this amendment would solve. No one has really stated how gay marriage has harmed our society, and backed it up with some real data. Sure, some people don't like the fact that some people are gay. I don't like the fact that some people are stupid, but I'm not about to lobby for a law outlawing stupidity. Marriage is a Civil agreement. It is the recognition, by the state, that two people are forming a household. It bestows certain rights on those two people so that they can visit each other in the hospital, can inherit when their partner dies, and can be covered by all the other protections afforded to married couples. Marriage is not necessarily a religious ceremony. Yes many people choose to be married by a religious figure, but it is not required. My wife and I were married by a Judge, and many people are married by state officials every day. Also remember that the end of the religious marriage ceremony goes like this, "With the power vested in me by the state of
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting free exercise thereof.”Amending the constitution to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman is an attempt to impose the religious views of one set of people on the entire population as a whole. Many people seem to think this is OK because it's, allegedly, the majority of people who want marriage defined this way. It's not OK. Our constitution was written to protect the minority, whether they be a political minority, a religious minority, or a racial minority. In this case gay couples need protection from the persecution of the majority. The same arguments that are used today against gay marriage were used in the past to argue against interracial marriage. These argument didn't work then, they never turned out to be true, and they shouldn't work today. I'm not gay. I know very few gay people. This amendment would never effect me or how I live my life. That will be the case for many of you reading this entry, but that doesn't mean you should ignore this issue. I urge you to write to your congressman, and tell him to vote against the Federal Marriage Amendment. Tell the Government that it has no right to intrude into our love life.