Posted on: Thursday, February 26, 2004

EDITORIAL
Don't mar Constitution with re-election ploys

A proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage sure makes us nostalgic for the mid-1800s.

That era saw the ratification of the 13th Amendment, which banned slavery; the 14th Amendment, which guaranteed all citizens equal protection of the laws; and the 15th Amendment, which extended the right to vote to all citizens, regardless of "race, color or previous condition of servitude." Granted, it took another 50 years to give women the right to vote. But it happened.

Well, more than a century later, we're looking at a possible 28th Amendment that would exclude gays from marriage. Religious ideology aside, what does that say about the 14th Amendment?

Nonetheless, President Bush has decided to back this divisive proposal as part of his reelection campaign. In so doing, Bush is reversing a trend of inclusionism that has made the U.S. Constitution the world's greatest document of democracy.

Not only would the Federal Marriage Amendment deny marriage to same-sex couples, but its language could also be used to prohibit civil unions and domestic partnership arrangements.

Fortunately, while most Americans oppose same-sex marriage, they're equally skittish about tampering with the U.S. Constitution.

At the end of the day, it is Congress that makes the call. An amendment requires a two-thirds vote by both the House and Senate as well as ratification by three-fourths of the states. These hurdles exist to keep the Constitution free of the forces of religious intolerance that inspired the document in the first place.

Ultimately, we simply cannot have new amendments contradicting the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.