Long a liberal state with beautiful, God-created landscapes but full of people who deny God and His natural design for marriage and family, Vermont is now an official homosexual “marriage” state.
On Tuesday, the overwhelming Democrat-controlled Vermont Legislature overrode Republican Governor Jim Douglas’ veto of “same-sex marriage” legislation approved by the Legislature. Vermont now joins Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa as the fourth state in the U.S. to allow marriage licenses to people who are physiologically unqualified to marry each other.
Vermont may not be fixable, but Iowa is. Yet accomplishing the task of truly protecting marriage requires principle, courage and perseverance.
If principled pro-family citizens lobby the Iowa General Assembly to pass a rock-solid constitutional marriage amendment (it must be approved by two successive legislatures), the vote will then go to the people who can override the judges.
The Iowa Constitution requires the General Assembly must vote once with one set of legislators, then a second time with after the next election. Therefore, the earliest the marriage amendment could be on the ballot is 2012.
The last several days, I’ve been in touch with influential pro-family people in Iowa to urge them to go forward. More importantly, though, was my intensive study on writing amendment language that will stick and have no holes. It’s unfortunate that the language introduced last month by Representatives Alons and Mertz is overly broad and won’t survive liberal court scrutiny. To ban any “legal union” but marriage could also ban credit unions, labor unions, business unions, etc.
To help, I’ve written an amendment that is rock solid. Here’s what needs to go into the Iowa Constitution to protect everything about marriage in Iowa law for marriage between one man and one woman:
a) The marriage contract is to be considered in law as a civil contract. Marriage shall be constituted by one man and one woman only. All other marriages are declared to be contrary to the public policy of this state and are void and unenforceable.
(b) Neither the General Assembly nor any court, government institution, government agency, local government, or government official shall recognize any relationship, other than a marriage, as entitling the parties to the rights, incidents, benefits, or privileges of marriage.
Tags: SaveCalifornia.com
RSS 2.0 Feed