GOP Senate paper outlines arguments for marriage amendment

[BR_Parkway]

http://rpc.senate.gov/_files/Mar2806MarriageAmendSD.pdf

GOP Senate paper outlines arguments for marriage amendment
Mar 31, 2006
By Michael Foust
Baptist Press

WASHINGTON (BP)--Failure of Congress to send a constitutional marriage amendment to the states likely will result in courts eventually legalizing "gay marriage" nationwide, a policy paper published by the U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee asserts.

"The greatest fallacy of the same-sex marriage debate is the well-meaning, but naïve, belief that Congress need do nothing and that the American people will sort the question out on a state level," the 16-page document, released March 28, says. "... The Constitution is being amended -- the only question is whether it will be by judges or by the people. Congress can either send an amendment to the states, or it can allow the courts to impose same-sex marriage nationwide."

<snip>

While recent polls have shown support for a federal marriage amendment hovering around 50 percent, support likely is "substantially" higher, the paper says. It notes that in the 19 states that have considered marriage amendments, voters have approved them with average support of 71.5 percent. But pre-election polls in those states typically have underestimated support for the proposals, the paper says. It lists 12 states where pre-election polling was conducted. In those states, the actual vote was an average of 10.5 percent higher than the pre-election poll. For example, Arkansas adopted an amendment with 75 percent of the vote in 2004, but the poll had support at only 65 percent. The same was true in the Democrat-leaning states of Michigan (59 percent vote total, 52 percent pre-election poll) and Oregon (57 percent vote total, 50 percent poll).

The paper surmises that respondents in the polls may have been "wary of giving their true beliefs to pollsters in light of some advocates’ disturbing tendency to label opposition to gay marriage as 'bigoted' or 'hateful.'" "Rather than invite hostile harassment from strangers calling their homes, some respondents appear to have kept their views private, and then expressed them at the ballot box when given the opportunity," the paper says. "In summary, although polling for a federal constitutional amendment suggests slim majority support at present, there is reason to believe that the actual support may be higher. And more importantly, the only way to know this for sure is to send an amendment to the states for ratification, and let the local political process function."

http://bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=22952

[saltpoint]

1. The GOP is choking and gasping its way forward without any vision

or worthy ideas, toting one domestic and foreign policy failure after another, so its only hope now to maintain pluralities is to play the gay marriage card.

When you don't have voters with brains, frighten them into wanting to control others' genitals.

Not much of a long-term strategy.

[BR_Parkway]

2. Yeah, it's coming, and it's going to be uglier than before I think

I'm going to keep asking - If you want to 'protect marriage' will you sign my petition to put a Constitutional amendment in place to ban divorce?

[saltpoint]

4. Good point. And why is heterosexual marriage so fragile that it

requires Constitutional protections?

[kevinbgoode]

9. Absolutely....and make them add the words "for a lifetime"

to their "definition of marriage" - it's about time these people are forced to take responsibility for violating their vows.

I say we send every member of Congress a testimony statement asking them to publicly take a vow that they were chaste until marriage, too.

[newswolf56]

5. U.S. Politics as Usual:

The people infinitely more bigoted than anyone dared imagine, and the Republicans jeerleading the lynch mob.

(By the way this should be in GD: oppression afflicts us all regardless of sexuality.)

[saltpoint]

6. Sure do like your verb 'jeerleading' and referring to the xenophobic

GOP red voters as bigots. Works for me. I don't know how else to explain many of the votes for Bush/Cheney, especially when their record of accomplishment in "security matters" was so spotty.

I appreciate that people can become frightened, but for that many voters to reject Kerry/Edwards and choose instead Bush/Cheney is hard to take. I'd like to see someone unearth a Diebold memo that discusses the rigged machines in Butler County, Ohio, or throughout New Mexico, or elsewhere... I'm not claiming such a memo exists but I am willing to believe that it might.

Awfully nice to run into you on DU, newswolf56. Loved your post.

[darkmaestro019]

3. Oh yes. How dare those bastards impose civil rights!

How dare they interfere with the right to oppress those icky queers! Next thing you know women will be able to vote and it'll be legal to be African-American or Jewish or bucktoothed or short!

[gizmo1979]

7. What about states rights?

Isn't that a Republican campaign plank?

[kevinbgoode]

8. What a crock. . .these people have absolutely no morals at all.

This party has to get kicked out of office all over the country.