Push for Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment

It's been announced that Mr. Bush, trying perhaps to shore himself up with his key supporters, will indeed push for the passage of a marriage amendment to the US Constitution that defines marriage as strictly between a male and a female.

Do we really want to do this? Are we prepared to change the constitution to specifically deny 10-15% of the population the right to have their unions sanctioned?

Let's set aside the gay component of this for a minute. I happen to believe - and it seems many share my view - that the constitution should not be amended capriciously. It's an important document that relates to the very nature and operation of our country and any changes to it should be considered very carefully. Unfortunately, not all existing amendments have been all that carefully considered before passage.

As a very young woman in the late 1970s and early 1980s, I really debated whether the Equal Rights Amendment should be applied to the constitution. While I liked much of what it was about, I felt that our constitution should embrace this as part of the natural course of our progressive country rather than require a separate amendment.

This amendment, as proposed, seems both narrow and hate-inspired. Traditional marriage between a man and a woman is hardly endangered by the ability - perhaps as soon as this May - for same gender people to marry. Our children are not endangered by giving gays the right to create loving, acknowledged unions.

If we value marriage so much, shouldn't we want others to embrace it and to recognize its sanctity, and be willing to apply their relationships to it? And even if you don't happen to believe such marriage is right, do you think it's wise to push through a constitutional amendment to disallow it?