We're not taking about Huckleberry ammending the Constitution. We're talking about a man who wants to change the document's intent entirely.

The first ammendment is pretty clear on religion, I think, and I don't need to quote it. But I think Thomas Jefferson is whorth quoting at this moment:

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
- Thomas Jefferson


Well, the issue of abortion is personal for me. It's an issue of who's rights *I* think are more important, but regardless of my personal opinion, is the Constitutional instruction on these kinds of issues.

It's a state's right.

As for same-sex marriage? I see no constitutional authority to ban it. It's not a matter of interpretation of the COnstitution that leads people to seperate arguments, but rather someone's personal interpretation of the Bible. And like Jefferson made clear, such interpretations are personal and do not belong in the realm of government.

Personally I don't want government in marriage at all... but that's just me.


WHERE you get your logic means a great deal. If it's not from the Constitution then it's not acceptable.

And all I'm saying is I can't respect a man who would even try to change the Constitution to reflect ANYONE'S will but the founding fathers.

Chief among them; Thomas Jefferson, who wished to enforce a seperation of Church and State.