Want Gay Marriage? Offer Your Own Amendment

The Senate will soon be taking up the Marriage Protection Amendment which is sure to fall short of the 67 votes needed to start the process of amending the Constitution. It's kind of a silly exercise, but one that is apparently required by the conservative religious right in order to put Senators on the record in time for the November election. Evangelicals have given the top Republican politicians the word that they need to pursue this legislation, even if doomed to fail, or else they risk losing the support of the religious right. President Bush is even backing the effort.

Dennis Byrne, writing at RealClearPolitics.com, has an idea for the gay lobby which is obviously opposed to this legislation: submit your own amendment:

Here's a suggestion: If pro-gay groups don't like the Marriage Protection Amendment--declaring that marriage in America shall consist solely of a union of a man and a woman--they should offer one of their own that will settle the issue once and for all.

The amendment would be as simple as the long-debated and failed Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, with the addition of one word and a small change to another:

"Equality of Rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of sexual orientation."
Then, let's see where the chips fall.

This is the best way to settle this fight, because the Sexual Orientation Protection Amendment (SOP) is exactly where the LesBiGayTransgender lobby wants to take us. Let's just stop tap dancing around same-sex marriage issue, and go to the real thing: The GayEtc. lobby wants equal rights not just in marriage, but also in e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g. SOP will let us have a real debate, while cutting through all the crap.
Of course, it'll never happen because the GayEtc. lobby won't go for it. For them, it's a sure loser. So, someone will have to do it for them.

Like the Protect Marriage Illinois campaign, which a few weeks ago filed 421,000 signatures calling for an Illinois constitutional amendment that would declare that "marriage between a man and a woman is the only legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State."

That was a strategic mistake. Instead, they should have gathered signatures to have a fall referendum on the Sexual Orientation Protection Amendment. Then they could have stood back and listened while the GayEtc. Lobby tried to defend their "equal rights" demands to a resistant public. And watched while the lobby got its butt whipped at the polls.

Byrne is suggesting that groups hostile to the gay agenda sponsor this type of amendment in order to defeat it soundly at the polls. Not a bad idea, if I say so myself. However, such an effort takes money and I doubt if either side will be willing to spend the dollars needed on such a campaign.