Monday, June 27, 2011

Herman Cain, DOMA and the marriage amendment

Unfortunately, Herman Cain struck out again today--at least in my book. 

Hugh Hewitt was interviewing Mr. Cain today. When asked about a constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man/one woman, Mr. Cain said he supported DOMA but not a constitutional amendment.

DOMA--the Defense of Marriage Act--was a compromise. It allowed the voters of each state to decide whether to redefine marriage to allow for same sex couples without forcing that decision on all other states. 

That compromise might have worked just fine if not for the Obama administration and the Democrats who fought to overturn DOMA--which would have forced same sex marriage on all states regardless of the will of the voters.

The only defense against this assault by Democrats is a marriage amendment. But make no mistake about it. The only reason a marriage amendment is necessary is because of the intolerance of Democrats and their refusal to compromise.


Kevin said...

A Constitutional Amendment seems unlikely to ever make it through both houses of congress with 2/3 majority and then through 3/4 of the states. So perhaps not fighting a losing battle is a smart decision.

Conservatives should address this issue on two fronts:

1) For those concerned about religious liberty; fight for religious liberty not against gay marriage. Fight for the freedom of religious organizations to choose who they interact with. Fight against draconian free speech laws. Fight for business to choose who they hire and fire (whether you agree w/ the decisions or not). Don't fight against gay marriage; fight for freedom.

2) If you're concerned about the impact of gay marriage on society... fight against gay marriage, and easy divorces, and abortion, and cyclic poverty in the inner city and rural areas; fight for good educations for poor kids, and jobs for single moms and better affordable (Christian run even!) day cares for kids whose parents have to work. Fight for families. Don't just fight against gay marriage. Attacks on gay marriage, should be embeded in an array of efforts to help protect children and single moms

Phil said...

This is one place where I stray from the common conservative perception and that is for one main reason. The Constitution and the purpose of the Constitution is to express the rights of the people, NOT to express the limitations of people's behavior.

Now, should gay marriage be fought? By all means!! However, in my humble opinion that oversteps the purpose of the Constitution and therefore, there should not be an amendment.