Help save marriage!

help get the petition out help save traditional
marriages thank you! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

Wouldn't it be better if we instead supported a national initiative to make infidelity a punishable offense? That would definetely save marriage as an institution.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by T00MuchCoffeeMan:
<strong>Wouldn't it be better if we instead supported a national initiative to make infidelity a punishable offense? That would definetely save marriage as an institution.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">What, you mean put some teeth back in the Alienation of Affection law? Wouldn't that be a shock? I remember this conversation on a thread some months ago and it was pointed out that in order to make the law a politician would have to vote for it, and after all look at their strong moral values!

I wish that law DID have teeth still, I would have loved to sue OM, their boss and heck, maybe even my in-laws. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

A marriage contract (and it is a contract) is the only contract in America that can legally be IGNORED and broken with no consequebces whatsoever.

Alienation of Affection laws are alive and well in North Carolina.

Use the laws in your state, if the laws are still good then use them..but this is something we can do, to help marriages. traditional ones.

I am not in a marriage any more..due to death now..
but boy if I could use the law the allienation one..I would go for it and would win it.

but that is not on the books here..

I wish people would use the laws that are on the books..even sodomy is still on the books in some places..

I think the world is getting so screwed up, and people pretending they don't know right from wrong, it is making life difficult for everyone.
IT makes me want to vomit..I feel like hiding someplace but where do you go to get away from this crazyness..

I remember when I was younger and could walk the streets and feel safe, play in a park, be out after dark..

all that has changed is people let the evil people win. evil is taking over because when something happens people instead of helping they say..BUT...or well IF..there is no it's ands and buts or what ifs..

there is right and wrong..and the people are winning...marriages are not sacred or safe.
our children are not safe either..if some gay person singles them out to introduce them to a gay lifestyle.

I have councelled lots of teenagers..who were suicidal because they thought they were gay..BECAUSE someone did something to them..and figured they were lesbian or homosexual because it was the same sex person and they thought they were now..one of them..so confused..and most dead because they did not know any different so they either continue in the lifestyle believing a lie..or else become a cutter..or commit suicide to get out..of the pain and shame..
it is all too sad...
God help us all!!!!

it saddens me to see you soliciting this here. i feel it has no place here. we are here to save our own marriages---not judge others for theirs. this is sad.

A Constitutional Amendment?

Please take a moment and read the following...these are the Amendments that have been made to the Constitution (edited somewhat for considerations of space):

Article I.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Article II.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Article III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Article IV.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Article V.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Article VI.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Article VII.

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Article VIII.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Article IX.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Article X.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Article XI.

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

Article XII.

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;--The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President...

Article XIII.

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Article XIV.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Article XV.

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Article XVI.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Article XVII.

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

Article XVIII.

Section 1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

Section. 2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Article XIX.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Article XX.

The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Article XXI.

The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.


Amendment XXII.

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

Amendment XXIII.

The District constituting the seat of government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a state, but in no event more than the least populous state; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the states, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a state; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

Amendment XXIV.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.



Amendment XXV.

Section 1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

Amendment XXVI.

The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.



Amendment XXVII.

No law varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives shall take effect until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
.
.
.
.
Now, what stands out when you compare these Amendments with the one proposed in the original post?

For me, it is the fact that only ONE of the Amendments (#18 regarding Prohibition, which is also the only Amendment to be repealed) deals with what could be construed to be a "moral" issue.

What does that tell you?

For me, it means that the Constitution of the United States, and its subsequent Amendments, deals only with the enumeration of powers granted to the government, the limits of those powers, and to provide for the protection of the rights of individual citizens.

The Constitution is not a moral code, nor is it a religious document, nor is it a document which favors a particular race, creed, or lifestyle.

This proposed Amendment would bring an end to that tradition, and put the government in the sticky business of legislating morality.

Sorry, but my government is supposed to build roads, defend the borders, and regulate trade...not peek into people's bedrooms and punish them for "immorality."

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Mad]" src="images/icons/mad.gif" />

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Sorry, but my government is supposed to build roads, defend the borders, and regulate trade...not peek into people's bedrooms and punish them for "immorality."</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Then please pray tell why does our government treat divorce like the bankkruptcy of a corporation?

...not to mention how the courts have taken steps beyond the will of the people... more and more...

...is this not a government of the people...
...and is it right for the judicial branch to quash that will...
(even if it's not your will/desire???)

...and the appointment of federal judges blocked... by litmus test of political correctness... is that OK too?

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="images/icons/frown.gif" />

Jim/NSR

Toomuchcoffeeman,

A counterpoint...if gay marriage were legalized, then gay divorce would follow.

Jim,

If the "will of the people" infringes upon the rights of other individuals, then the Constitution and the Bill of Rights specifically grants the judicial branch the power to quash that will.

The end of slavery, women's suffrage, and desegregation were all contrary to the "will of the people" at some point, yet failed when held up to the standards spelled out in our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. When necessary, the Constitution was amended to make this clear.

Since when is deviant behavior... 'a right'?

Why is it you can't accept the fact that there is a next step...
...the 'right' of tri-unions
...the 'deprived' right of non-monogimous unions
...the 'right' to live in multiple adulterous relationships
...the 'right' of 'man-boy' relationships...
...the 'right' of beastiality
...the 'right' of anything goes

...is every behavior not meritorious (by your argument)... not worthy of being deemed a 'RIGHT'?

...is there no point at which... our posterity can be protected from a depraved sense of immorality?... for the sake of yes... PC?

Yes...
end of slavery... was a correction of an evil
women's suffrage... was a correction of an injustice
and desegregation... was a correction of an injustice

...what we are being asked here is...
...can we now take an deviant, abberational behavior... and make it just?

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

Jim/NSR

cjack, I don't see your argument at all. The marital ammendment is not defining morality, it is defining for the purposes of law, exactly what a marriage is. I see no difference there then an ammendement mentioning women because it was unclear whether original language saying men was the general term for all people (ditto for clarifying race issues). A marital ammendment would also be similar in spirit to clarifications of relgion.

Morality would be telling who could get married (and no, who does not include same gender, that is to put it bluntly...ignorant, no one with any intellectual honesty would argue that marriage evolved as homosexual paradigm, it evolved from procreation concerns). Morality would be passing laws (as often were the case) about socio-economic constraints, what married people can do sexually, and so forth.

However, this is all moot, cause it is not about marriage, it is about a shift in power. Heterosexuals enjoy more economic power, and cultural status than homosexuals, and that annoys advocates for homosexuals. I suspect if marriage were abolished alltogether in any state sense (leaveing it only a relgious activity), homosexuals would have no interest in, or advocate for "legalized" marriage. No ammendment will stop this shift of power, if the homosexual interest groups amass enough political muscle, they can use the courts, and pass laws giving them each of the specific benefits heteros enjoy. Such as mandateing insurance companies cover "domestic partners", stiffening laws that make it illeagle to "discriminate" so gays can force themselves into any enviroment...They tried to do this with the Boy Scouts of America (force the organization to allow avowed homosexuals leadership positions with the boys), and lost on religious grounds...but not by much.

I haven't read the petition yet, but will. How about contacting each of our state Reps in each of our states and asking them to design a petition to put a bill in congress?
I will contact mine. He's always answered me.
LouLou

Jim,

So, homosexuals are deviants on the same level as child molesters?

Homosexuals are no better than people who practice bestiality?

Is that really what you think?

If you really think that gays are just depraved individuals, should we start locking them up?
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="images/icons/frown.gif" />

sufdb,

I would argue that it IS a moral issue. This amendment push is nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction by religious groups who feel that homosexuality is immoral or depraved.

Do we really need a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage? I think that's a little excessive, don't you?

That is the main point I was trying to make. I realize I've been sidetracked a bit, but let me repeat that this Amendment is excessive, unnecessary, and hopelessly out of step with the Constitution.

Marriage is (at the civil level) nothing more than a contract. A piece of paper that (as some of us have found) can be voided by the state. Now, I would be the first to point out that marriage is much, much more than that, but as far as the government is concerned, marriage is a contract between two people. On that basis, this amendment will fail, because all it does is discrimintate against who can enter into a contract based upon their sexual orientation.

As you pointed out, the Boy Scouts were able to discriminate against homosexuals based upon religious grounds. As the government of the United States is secular and officially neutral (or at least, its supposed to be) on matters of religion, this amendment won't fly.

excuse me but maybe some of us around here to bank the flames of our passions where the insitution of marriage is concerned! relationships can't be governed by the law anymore then morality can be governed. if we want change then we have to educate people as to why change is needed...not demand that they see things our way or else! sorry folks but even a dirty low down cheat has the right to be just that if they're so inclined. we may not like it but our very way of life demands that we tolerate it.
coach

cjack:...

...behavior... behavior... behavior...

...it affects adults... children... and families.

We can't just close our eyes and pretend it doesn't exist!

'deviant' BEHAVIOR... is that which deviates... in the the case of homosexual BEHAVIOR... and it deviates greatly!

'abberational' BEHAVIOR... is that which is an abberation... (implied 'substantial') from the norm.

Is that the only reason the BEHAVIOR is wrong...
...NO...
...it's the impact on 'family'... and 'children'... that in the end counts!

...can anyone say... 'family rights"???

To assume that this form of behavior will be exclusively 'behind closed doors'... once the status of a valid 'marriage' has been conferred upon such a union... is closing one's eyes!

==================

On the issue of 'toleration'...
...today one may say... I only want to go as far as 'marriage'... being allowed.

What is to say that another group, let's say NAMBLA... says.... we too deserved the 'RIGHT"!

Can anyone say where you are going to draw the line?... and if so...where will the line be drawn?

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

Jim/NSR

<small>[ July 20, 2003, 05:20 PM: Message edited by: NSR ]</small>

It's interesting that people here, (of all places), believe that we can legislate fidelity, marriage, or our feelings...

In my opinion, no amount of legislation, consequences, or any other type of punishment will do anything to keep marriages together. That has to come as a free CHOICE that both people make.

Jim,

I had no idea you were so intolerant.

The "line" is drawn at what CONSENTING ADULTS can and cannot do in the privacy of their own homes. I believe the government has no business dictating this.

If you truly believe that homosexuality is a deviant, criminal behavior which should be punished by the government, then I really don't know how to respond.

I got plenty of good advice and support from you during a difficult time in my life.

It saddens me to discover so much hatred and intolerance coming from you. I have lost a great deal of respect for you. Perhaps all of it.

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="images/icons/frown.gif" />

Has anyone bothered to go read the amendment>>???
has anyone looked at the place where they will send a message to your representative..so you can have your voice heard..you also have the right to let them know your feelings if you think other wise.

I just don't think queers need a marriage license,
they already have proven their point and come out in public..

don't we have the right as married couples to keep a covenant between us and OUR GOD?? they cannot do that..because they serve the god of the world which is not the same as we do..because OUR GOD..the father of Jesus Christ is not going to allow them into
HIS KINGDOM..it says so..if you want to be with them fine..your choice but we have the right to stand for what we believe to be true..

Jesus died for all sinners..and those who choose to accept that fine..but don't throw sin back in Jesus face..don't keep practicing sin..if your an adulterer don't keep practicing it..either..same thing child molester.stop doing it..it is simple.
get your act together..stop...now..there are things we do but things that are sin and we do it and we knowingly keep doing it..is somehow stupidity..don't you think..you have not come into the knowledge of God..and have wisdom from God because if you did you would want to please HIM and also you would make your marriage work..work harder at doing things that are right..it takes work..being happy and being a christian is hard not easy..but it makes you to be able to sleep at night...and I think it is sad that this world is so screwed up..and people don't even know when things are right or wrong..
how gross do people have to be..
your grandchildren will be having sex with animals and your gonna think that is ok?? they already do that some kids do....people get your heads out of the sand..it is already happening..
I have talked to kids who have done it with animals..it is not in the future it is happening now..alot of them are wanting to die because of things they have done and feel not forgiven by God..because some screwball turned them onto the same sex convince them its ok to be gay ok to have sex with animals..makes me want to barf..I
am so sad over the state of some kids as young as 12 on the internet and places they go..it is sick..and you worry about your husbands check your kids computers but the thing is they know more then you do and brag how parents don't know how to find their stuff,one kid had his puter fixed to mail letters to announce his suicide to his friends after his death...how sick is that..
too many children going to hell...why? because of these people who don't hurt anyone..only want people to accept them to get closer to the kids..to teach them..give me a break...save your children homeschool them..save them and yourself..
find God while HE can still be found..

And here we go...

Isn't this God that you speak of supposed to be forgiving? And isn't it in the bible that it's God, and ONLY God that's supposed to be the ultimate judge? Isn't it always preached here and everywhere to let go and let God? If these people are committing such horrendous and dispicable acts...won't God take care of it in his/hers own way?

I get so tired of religion being used to create hurt and hatred. I thought the basis of God and all religion was supposed to be love. This stuff just makes me sad. Please take your crusade elsewhere. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="images/icons/frown.gif" />