The Elfin Blog

As the debate over the Bush administration’s proposed amendment to the Constitution heats up, I thought I’d add some food for thought. In addition to my previous discussion of reserved powers, which centers around the Tenth Amendment, I also think that a strong argument can be made for the rights of individuals to marry under the Ninth Amendment. In the case of the Tenth Amendment, I think it is clear that the national government is overstepping its bounds in terms of its rightful power (which is why they need an amendment in the first place). In the case of the Ninth Amendment, it seems to me that even the states must take care in the laws that they make restricting the rights of the people. In either case I firmly believe this is a battle that must be fought in the states.

Furthermore, since marriage is really more of a religious institution, at least for most people, I would think that this is also a First Amendment issue. Marriage has its roots in religious practices, and therefore the government really can’t restrict who gets married at all as long as they offer any marriage contract at all. Dictating who may and may not get married based on sex seems to be more of a religious decision and therefore out of the scope of governmental power.

Any amendment passed that bans same sex marriage would clearly stomp on a whole lot of rights for a whole lot of people, and more importantly, it opens the door for further abuses of power. Banning same sex marriage with this amendment would give the federal government legal grounds for restricting, modifying, and changing many other rights that belong to the people. This is a dangerous slippery slope, and we must, in all cases ere on the side of the people’s rights.

Finally, and this isn’t necessarily reserved for the debate over gay marriage, aren’t we at war? Doesn’t our President have something better to do? Can’t Congress find something more important with which to concern themselves? How about the mounting national debt, for example? Or maybe the fact that we still have people in this country with no food, shelter, or health care? If the federal government wants to stick its nose in other people’s business, can’t it at least be over something important? And this leads to an even more ominous question: why now? Why, in the midst of so many other problems, does the Bush administration want to seize this power now? What else are they trying to gain? Could it be a back door to taking away other rights that they can’t get at in the name of national security? Is that why they are trying to fight this battle now, when there is clearly a long list of other items that are more important to our country? It certainly makes one wonder.

“The sleep of reason brings forth monsters.” — Goya

By the way, Skippy has been hosting an interesting discussion on his blog about this very issue.