How do you define marriage?


aamuprettywoman

aamuprettywoman

AAMU all day every day!
Help me out....this is a news story that will probably be done tomorrow in my show.


In the U.S. :

The traditional image:

Partners?
A man and a woman together through religious, spiritual and emoitional beliefs who vow to hold true to their beliefs and desires?

The union of man and woman recognized both socially and legally?


Well, however you define it. A group of religious leaders are proposing an amendment to incoporate that tradition into the constitution.

But, some say the proposal amounts to discrimination.

"Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. "

The creators of the proposed federal marriage amendment say the purpose is to get the same marriage rights as heterosexual couples.

So where do gays and lesbians fit in?

The group is saying gays and lesbians have a right to do as they choose. They affirm that. "They don't have a right to redefine for our entire society through the courts."

What do you think?:xeye:
 
APW,

Good question. Is this "Federal Marriage Amendment" a law or is it in the constitution??? If it's in the constitution, then the short answer is, once the constitution is amended to say "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman," then that is the only recognizable marriage under the constitution. This situation is not like challenging a state law by saying it's unconstitution. You can't challenge that because you're saying that the constitution is unconstitutional, which ain't possible. The constitution is what it is. Really, it's a way around the courts. If the legislature wanna make sure that the supreme court can't change a law, all they have to do is change the constitution to say so. The Supreme Court is a "constitutional" court, meaning that's where it originates. All of it's powers are from the Constitution, which is controlled by Congress. Congress could write the Supreme Court out of the constitution and then the Court would no longer exist.

Same thing with this marriage law. Once the amendment is made to the constitution it is rock solid. Nobody, but Congress, can change it.

If, on the other hand, this deal is a federal law, the gays will have to challenge it in the courts to have it declared unconstitutional. It'll probably go all the way to the Supreme Court in about 5 years.

I don't think same sex marriages should be allowed, personally. They can still have their relationships, just no marriages.
 

I'm not sure if its in the constitution...

I don't have my hard copy of the script I had earlier so...I'll have to check that out.
 
Originally posted by Robber
Congress could write the Supreme Court out of the constitution and then the Court would no longer exist.
Click to expand...
Not to get off-track or anything, but Congress does not have the power to wype out the Supreme Court. It all goes back to "checks and balances". Just as the same as congress could not disregard the people, because the constitution was written for that purpose. The only ones who has the power to change something like that are the people of the US.

Anyway, I agree though with you that they should not allow same-sex marriages in the constitution. Marriage is an act reconized by God. A sacriment. Obviously it is stated that homosexuality is a disgraceful thing in the eyes of the lord. Not to sound all closed minded or anything, but if you look at what marriage is and where it comes from, why would two people of the same sex want to get married. They think the normal thing to do would be to get married, but it's not at all.
 
Originally posted by Mr. SWAC
<font color=red>Not to get off-track or anything, but Congress does not have the power to wype out the Supreme Court. It all goes back to "checks and balances". Just as the same as congress could not disregard the people, because the constitution was written for that purpose. The only ones who has the power to change something like that are the people of the US.</font>

Anyway, I agree though with you that they should not allow same-sex marriages in the constitution. Marriage is an act reconized by God. A sacriment. Obviously it is stated that homosexuality is a disgraceful thing in the eyes of the lord. Not to sound all closed minded or anything, but if you look at what marriage is and where it comes from, why would two people of the same sex want to get married. They think the normal thing to do would be to get married, but it's not at all.
Click to expand...

Congress has the power to amend the constitution. Congress wrote it, Congress can change it. Not the people. Congress. I never said that they'd have the stones to do it, but Congress could straight wipe the Supreme Court out by taking out the very Article that created the court. This ain't got nothing to do with "the people". And they would have to answer to the people if they tried. And "no", I don't think they would succeed if they tried. In theory, however, it could happen.
 
Originally posted by Robber
APW,

. If the legislature wanna make sure that the supreme court can't change a law, all they have to do is change the constitution to say so. The Supreme Court is a "constitutional" court, meaning that's where it originates. All of it's powers are from the Constitution, which is controlled by Congress
Click to expand...

Article V. of the constitution mention that any changes must be ratified by three forths of the states, or by Conventions in three forths there of.......

check and balance.

Sen Byrd send help.
 
BUSTED!!!!

Bg,

I thought I was yo boy.:D

Thanks for the clarification.

:ducks out, hoping Mr. SWAC doesn't come back and see this::D
 
Re: BUSTED!!!!

Originally posted by Robber
Bg,

I thought I was yo boy.:D

Thanks for the clarification.

:ducks out, hoping Mr. SWAC doesn't come back and see this::D
Click to expand...

you're still my boy, but like Sen Byrd I have my own pocket copy of the constitution. I'm a big fan of the political process.;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top