A proposed 28th Amendment to the Consitution of the United States of America.

[strredwolf]

Amendment XXVIII

Section I: The right of citizens of the United States to marry shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race or sexual preference.

Section II: The right of religious organizations to refuse to perform a marriage on the basis of sexual preference shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state.

Section III: Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

---

Moment Rabbit and Canada had the right idea.

Comments

[oby.livejournal.com]

I would prefer having "sexual preference" rephrased to "preference of gender or sex".

"Sexual Preference" is so wide it could arguably include pedophilia, zoophilia, polygamy, polygandy, etc. All of these are sexual preferences. I'm not sure if that's something that should be automatically protected by the Federal Government. At least, not as of yet.

[strredwolf.livejournal.com]

That is a good point, as I'm aiming to be specific to same-sex marriage.

[bibliophage.livejournal.com]

Section I: The right of the citizens to marry shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or its members in any way, shape, or form.

Section II: No organization, secular or religious, shall create legislation to restrict the definition of marriage between consenting adults by race, religion, creed, gender, age, or number.

Section III: No legislation shall be allowed requiring any persons or businesses to provide or deny benefits solely on the grounds of marriage.

[kazriko.livejournal.com]

This seems to match up to what I would like to a fair extent. I mainly just want government entirely out of the whole marriage business, and to eliminate any laws that give any preferential or detrimental treatment based on marital status.

[griffinwolf.livejournal.com]

Ooops,

or did I completely misread section 2.... and that my stance agrees with it? Ah, whoops, nm ;)

Deleted my posts

[strredwolf.livejournal.com]

Section 2 is to let various churches perform the marriages in accordance to their faith, reinforcing the 1st Amendment. Section 1 shouldn't be used to force said churches to perform them.

Besides, we got government that does it too -- my sister and bro-in-law had a civil marriage.

[kusanagi-sama.livejournal.com]

Question: Is this an actual proposed amendment that congress is putting forth, or is it one you came up with?

[strredwolf.livejournal.com]

One I came up with, since I see all this mess California's Prop 8 is, and the piecemeal approach (state by state) just isn't working very well.

[kusanagi-sama.livejournal.com]

Ah, ok. However, I think bibliophage's is better since it doesn't specifically target religion, and I agree with him that this shouldn't be legislated either.