Marriage Equality is, of all Gay issues, the most important of all and I’ll tell you why:

Money makes the political machine move.

Our right to marriage, emotional benefits aside, are politically crucial in gaining all of the other needed protections and benefits for Gays and Lesbians. Even Gays who do not ever care to be married are affected by the lesser financial status of Gay society overall. It is Finances that make political agendas happen. Currently Gays are financially oppressed because we do not receive the huge financial benefits which are currently only given to Straight couples.

If Gay folks ever want to have a society free or even freer of harassment and oppression, then it is strategically important that we and/or our friends gain the financial power to devote toward Gay political movements. This is a practical matter. Marital Status under the federal Government makes a difference of hundreds of thousands of dollars over a lifetime to the median wage earner. Greater earnings means greater political power, directly.

Also, I currently see Gay and Gay-aligned activists like Coulter, or other National figures, attempting to cloud Gay issues with thoise of the GOP by telling us that they are genuinely promoting Gays, but rather bolstering the ailing GOP. This is a ploitical maneuver of the GOP.

Troubling to me are those national Gay leaders who campaign touting Gay rights, some of whom I have personally donated to, taking in large amounts of Gay money, intended clearly to be for the use of said mission, AND THEN they turn around and present themselves in the Generally Conservative Arena using my Gay money promoting either themselves as a Conservative Candidate, or as an overall Conservative Promoter, who happens to be Gay. Problem. This is a misuse of the hard earned money of Gay Americans. The GOP will never help Gays, period.

The most recent Congressional vote to take place on the proposed Amendment occurred in the United States House of Representatives on July 18, 2006 when the Amendment failed 236 yea to 187 nay votes, falling short of the 290 yea votes required for passage in that body. The Senate has only voted on cloture motions with regard to the proposed Amendment, the last of which was on June 7, 2006 when the motion failed 49 yea to 48 nay votes, falling short of the 60 yea votes required to proceed to consideration of the Amendment.

And that was when the GOP was in control of everything.

Nevertheless, I doubt 2/3 of the Senate and House would vote to ban same-sex marriage and that it would also pass in 38 states. Sure, such a proposed amendment would likely garner 50-60 votes with the bigots / scared people in the Senate, but I don’t believe there would be 67 votes. (At least with the CURRENT makeup.)

You are absolutely wrong. If one Amendment “seems” to conflict with another, the court has to somehow reconcile them, or rule the new Amendment creates an exception to a general rule.

Mr. McCain, you never cease to disappoint me.

As far as I remember from a constitutional law class I took a LONG time ago, the Supreme Court still has the power to interpret newly added constitutional amendments as “constitutional” or not in light of other amendments and articles of the Constitution. If one amendment is in conflict of the spirit of the Constitution or other amendments of the constitution, it (or provisions thereof) may be rendered without merit. (I think.)

If I am wrong, or full of it, please correct me, and tell me why. Like I said, it’s been a while.

You are of course right on the mechanics, but Brad is right on the morals.