Let us propose a constitutional amendment to ban divorce

[BOSSHOG]

If for no other reason than to see:

Hundreds of thousands of "christian conservatives" marching in Washington to oppose a liberal effort to maintain the sanctity of marriage, and to insist on their right to divorce as many goddamn times as they want.

Who the hell are we to take their "constitutional" right to marry, divorce, marry, divorce, marry, divorce ad nauseum away, especially when they are spending millions to maintain the sanctity of marriage by preventing people who love each other from getting married? So much material!

[TallahasseeGrannie]

1. Excellent idea

if they want to go there...we will follow.

[MadMaddie]

2. Seriously I think we should do this....

the money that they have spent on their insane causes...they could have helped people that needed and wanted their help...instead they want to interfere with everyones life

The red states have the highest divorce rates in the nation.....Oh what would they do?

[napi21]

3. I AGREE completely!!!!! I've been saying this for a long time.

If they're so damn worried about the sanctity of marriage, they sure should be totally against divorce! Of course, how many of out Reps & Sens are already divorced at least once already? Hmmmm

I think we ought to call their bluff! Tell 'em we'll go along with their no gay marriage thing as long as THEY agree to STOP all divorce!

[BOSSHOG]

4. Actually

I'd like to allow gay marriage. I'm no lawyer but help me out here. If gay marriage is not constitutional now, why does the constitution have to be amended to prevent it? If you want to get married (in any combination) go for it, but it will be a lifetime commitment just like the vow states.

[napi21]

16. You missed my point. I don't care wether some gay couple gets

married or wether they don't. But the people doing all the bit*hing care enough to want laws AGAINST IT. They claim to be worried about "the sanctity of marriage!". I said if that's REALLY their reason, then fine, enact laws against BOTH gay marriage & divorce, since it's divorce that is destroying the sanctity of marriage most often! Most of the ones complaining are already divorced, so they'll NEVER agree to this option, but it points out in the public forum, just how hypocritical they are!!!!!

[BlueEyedSon]

5. outlaw any sex outside of marriage (i.e. before or after marriage) or

any sex that is not specifically for procreative purposes.

[BOSSHOG]

6. Roger that teammate

and mandate stoning to death all who dare work on the Sabbath.

[AndyA]

7. It would be hypocritical of them to not agree

Because the sanctity of marriage must be preserved at all costs. Bush said so. Can't have those gay people getting married and ruining it for everyone.

I agree 100% - make the MoFos stick to their commitments!

ONE MAN + ONE WOMAN + ONE TIME + FOREVER = MARRIAGE

[BR_Parkway]

11. Since the various states have made showings that the whole one

man/one woman is a vital state interest that "needs" be protected - why couldn't some group start filing to throw out people's lawsuits for divorce?

I'm not saying this correctly in legal sense I'm sure - but since some of these anti-gay amendments have been upheld with the State arguing that this is necessary to the State - it seems like the same arguement could be used to block divorces. Wouldn't that put some knickers in a twist for all them str8 folks who couldn't wait to rush down to the polls and block the homos from tax breaks.

[BR_Parkway]

8. I'm in favor - I'd also like to hang out at the courthouse and file charge

of the crime of adultery against everyone obtaining a marriage license for the 2nd (3rd, 4th) time. After all, I can quote the Scripture that shows Jesus himself saying remarriage is adultery. No parsing, no equivocating, simply stated.

My uncle (Southern Baptist preacher) tried to give me greif when I bought home same sex partner to a family function (and equal greif to my parents/kids/siblings who support my relationship and love my partner). He was in fine form - I was going to hell, they were all going to hell for supporting it - right up until I pointed out that he married a woman who was previously divorced (with a kid, no claim could be made that it wasn't consumated) and quoted him chapter and verse.

I get so tired of these cafeteria KKKristians trying to impose their will on the rest of us in the name of God's will. I'd happily support an amendment to ban all divorce.

[BOSSHOG]

9. Its hard work living by the bible

That's why "christians" set up so many tax exempt buffets. Pick and choose what suits you.

[Warpy]

10. Don't worry, it's on their list

along with women's suffrage, birth control, public education, social security, family leave from work, and all the other profamily things that the liberals fought for. Divorce is VERY profamily when there's substance abuse and/or violence involved.

That's the real culture war, folks, and why we need to call them unchristian every chance we get. They despise families, children, women. It's time to call them on every damned bit of it.

[onenote]

12. sure, cause the voters will rally when presented something stupid

I understand the frustration behind the suggestion and the desire to point out the hypocrisy of the fundie right. But to the average person, its would simply look like a sophomoric stunt.

No one is going to "march" against this because no one is really going to support it. In fact, what would happen if the repubs pushed for a vote. Would divorced Democrats vote for it, thus looking hypocritical? WOuld everyone vote against it, thus establishing that it was silly waste of time?

The key for Democrats is to establish that they are the party with ideas and competency. Chimpy and his gang have left the door wide open. But you can't seriously think this sort of silly idea is going to change anyone's mind. It will just look frivolous.

onenote

[BOSSHOG]

14. Any less frivolous then banning gay marriage?

If the constitution must be amended to ban gay marriage, does that mean that gay marriage is constitutional now? I agree a sophomoric or freshmanamoric stunt is the only thing necessary to make the religious right look idiotic and hypocratic. But lets put it on the table. I'm straight, happily married for 32 years and yes I think it will change lots of minds. The only reason there is not mass opposition to the hate and idiocy of the right is lack of sophomoric stunts. They are taken too seriously and considered too legitimate. My time supporting and defending the constitution has me on constant guard. They are scum and they want to replace your constitutional liberties with whatever the fuck they want for you. There is nothing frivolous about my notions.

[onenote]

18. I have no problem with the ends, but just don't think the means work

Again, play it out. A leading Democrat (presumably not divorced) introduces the resolution. The papers and news channels immediately treat it for what it is...a stunt. Instead of focusing on the hypocrisy of the right, they will focus on how many Democrats (since a Democrat started the ball rolling) would run afoul of the provision. Probably more than the number of repubs, although I can't say that for certain. They'll pick on Democratsa like Feingold (divorced once, getting a second) as well as Kennedy, Kerry, Wyden, Carper, Dodd, and probably others. Leno and Letterman will make jokes about it and the public will be turned off. THere will be no serious discussion. In fact, the opposite will occur. The seriousness of the issue will be trivialized, which will be a setback, not an advance.

I wish it weren't so, but I have no doubt how it would play out.

onenote

[madmadmad]

13. i'm with you!

down with the hypocrites!

[slide to the left]

15. Its funny

that divorce rates are higher in red states.

[tetedur]

17. Thou shall not commit adultery.

One of the ten commandments they want to stick in everybody's face at the courthouse.

Jesus said: Moses allowed divorce because you are hard-hearted. I say if you divorce one and marry another you are commiting adultery.

Where do you go to get a divorce? The Courthouse.

[radfringe]

19. I disagree

99.9% divorces are the result of bad marriages - we should ban marriages and that would eliminate the need for divorces. Abstinence only for everyone! Just say "I DON'T"
:sarcasm: