Don't be tinkering with the Constitution

by David Grand
March 11, 2004

Gotta hand it to Bush and his guru Karl Rove for that cleverly contrived, political maneuver in proposing a Constitutional amendment that would ban the 600,000 same-sex couples in the U.S. from exchanging the same marital vows as "straight"couples and enjoying the same legal rights of matrimony.

And here I thought they were too busy ducking the brickbats Kerry's been throwing at 'em and, in turn, throwing theirs at him to have the time to engage in such petty "gay bashing," for the obvious, dual-purpose of energizing the conservative base and deflecting the nation's attention away from the pressing issues of today. But maybe they just needed a break from the monotony of fund raising and rehearsing his speeches word by word.

But at least Bush wasn't being a total hypocrite like Chaney, who'd stated during the 2000 campaign that the question of whether or not gay marriages should be allowed is best left up to the states to decide without Federal interference. However, his now doing a complete flip-flop on the issue and coming out four-square for the ban apparently didn't bother his conscience one bit, albeit that his daughter Mary is openly gay. I wonder, though, if he'd show up at her wedding and invite the prez to attend? (I'd sure like to be a mouse at that ceremony when and wherever it takes place, even if I didn't get a piece of the cake.)

Now, like most Americans, I consider the Constitution to be sacrosanct and the underpinning and guiding light of our Republic, which has withstood the test of time and remained as sturdy as the Rock of Gibraltar during the most turbulent storms that have swirled around it. And as Jefferson said, "some men look at it with sanctimonious reverence, and deem it like the ark of the covenant, too sacred to be touched."  

And even though it has been "touched" with 27 Amendments over the years, our Founding Fathers would not only roll over in their graves but bounce right out of 'em screaming epithets for even contemplating treating any Americans like second-class citizens in the document they crafted and slaved over for 17 weeks.    

But if Bush were to retreat from his hard-line position on the issue, those who fervently support the proposed ban would no doubt feel betrayed and not turn out in force on election day, much as they did in 2000 because his campaign didn't inspire them. Conversely, if he sticks to his guns, he stands to lose what support he may have had among the "middle-of-the-roaders" and independent voters for discriminating against a certain class of people, not to mention losing the votes of the 1 million gays who voted for him in 2000.

Personally, I believe that to hold-up marriage between a man and woman as being sacred (while true for many couples) is the height of self-delusion, when fifty percent of all marriages end in divorce at the rate of a million or more every year since 1975; and that the marital vow of "till death do us part"  should be changed to"till death or divorce do us part."

And same-sex couples do not, contrary to widespread opinion, represent a threat to our society or to the so-called, marriage institution, what with 68 percent of them owning their own homes, with 12.7 percent of 'em  being veterans (same as for heterosexual couples ), having an average household income of s $73,000, with 30 percent having their own children under 18 (56 percent of which have two or more), and with their purchasing power being 44 percent of the total $485 billion spent annually by the 14 to 16 million gays in this nation. They sure don't look like losers or dregs of society to me.     

But if history is any guide, it's easier to climb Mt. Everest in gym shoes than to tinker with the Constitution, with only 17 amendments having been added since the 10 in the Bill of RIghts were tacked on in 1791. And as Bush and his sidekick knew beforehand that the proposed ban on same-sex marriages was DOA in Congress, as were the oft-proposed amendments to require a balanced budget, to permit prayers in public schools and to ban flag burning. And even if it did get passed, the chances of it then being ratified by at least 38 states is as unlikely as my being transported in a time machine back to my younger days when I was regarded as a sex symbol and God's gift to women. It plain ain't gonna happen.