We donÂ’t hear much about the federal marriage amendment these days. Atlanta Journal-Constitution columnist Jay Brookman wants to ascribe that to insincerity and political opportunism.

Think back a little more than a year ago, to the political campaigns of 2004. One of the hottest issues in presidential debates and congressional campaigns was the threat to traditional marriage posed by gay people seeking the right to wed.

At the time, President Bush and others were warning that the threat could be averted only by the most serious step available under our political system, amending the U.S. Constitution to ban gay marriage outright.

You may also remember how heated and emotional some of the rhetoric became. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family and probably the most influential of conservative religious leaders, reflected the tone quite well in his April 2004 newsletter.

"Barring a miracle, the family as it has been known for more than five millennia will crumble, presaging the fall of Western civilization itself" unless the U.S.

Constitution is amended, Dobson wrote, charging that for more than 40 years, gay Americans have pursued a master plan "that has had as its centerpiece the utter destruction of the family."

That kind of rhetoric had its desired effect, driving conservative voters to the polls in large numbers, helping to re-elect President Bush and increasing Republican representation in Congress and state legislatures.

But a year later, it seems pertinent to ask: Have you heard or read a single word about a federal gay-marriage amendment since the election?

No, you have not, because this supposedly all-important issue has vanished from the political landscape. Judging from the available evidence, this dire threat to marriage and family, this looming peril to the very core of American society, has simply disappeared as a concern. Certainly, nobody's talking about it or trying to do anything about it any longer.

Now this is partially true. There just is not a lot being done about the federal amendment. The reason is simple – the votes in Congress simply are not there to get the thing sent on to the states.

That does not mean nothing is happening.

Just last month, Texas passed an amendment banning gay marriage. Several states have placed marriage amendments on their ballots for different dates over the next year. In addition, petition drives and legislative action to place them on the ballot in other states are also underway. In other words, the action is currently being found at the state level, since there is little likelihood of one passing at the federal level now.

So while it is possible to claim that the issue of gay marriage was simply a wedge issue in 2004, it is more accurate to see it as having been moved from one battlefield to another for the time being. But he is right on one matter – the issue will be raised in the 2006 elections.

Not as a wedge issue insincerely used to garner votes, but because more and more states are placing traditional marriage in their state constitutions because the will of the people is being ignored on the federal level.

Posted by: Greg at 01:37 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 545 words, total size 3 kb.