</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />
Originally Posted by (Kyran,) America is not a theocracy. This amendment is not constitutional. The constitution limits the government, not people.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
The amendment is constitutional. By definition. Any amendment becomes part of the constitution, and is therefore constitutional.
FWIW: The argument is that limiting government's authority to recognize and perform marriage to one man and one woman is in fact a limit on government. Feel free to disagree, I think most of the arguments on both sides are semantics anyway.</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />
Originally Posted by (Kyran,)
With that said, let me be clear that I believe marriage is a function of religion. It is not necessary to the role of the state. My recommendation is that marriage be deregulated and delegislated.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
We can agree on this. The only reason that this is an issue is that the government interferes so much with liberty and with what should be private associations.
Having said that, given the breadth of governmental influence, and the political activism that currently inhabits the judicial branch, the amendment will pass, probably within the next two to three years. If for not other reason than the states that will see this as one of their rare opportunities to oppose the ever encroaching tide of federalism.