The U.S. Senate has defeated a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. That's fine. The U.S. Constitution shouldn't be cluttered up with social issues that should be defined by the states.Absolutely, and the people have spoken on this matter. According to results of last month's Washington Post-ABC News poll, when voters were asked about the most important issue in November's election, they chose the economy, Iraq, immigration, gas prices, terrorism and health care. Same-sex marriage merited only an asterisk, meaning it rated below 0.5 percent of responses.
Enshrining a social decision in the Constitution makes it a legal, not a political issue, and that should be done sparingly. We are still paying the price, in rancor and sometimes even violence, of the Supreme Court's arrogance in doing the same thing with abortion. Left to the states, most abortions would be legal, because that's where the weight of public opinion falls. And since it would be subject to democratic debate, it would cease to be such a galvanizing issue.
The same is true of gay marriage. If people don't want it, it shouldn't be force-fed to them by arrogant judges, as it was in Massachusetts. If public opinion evolves, the political system should be given room to reflect that fact. The point of democracy, after all, is to let the people govern themselves. [Emphasis added.]
Would someone please point that out to Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) who said this following defeat in the Senate: "I do not believe the sponsors are going to fall back and cry about it. I think they are going to keep bringing it up."