[link=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4360783/]Breaking News:[/link] In a press conference today, President Bush anounced his support for the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) to the US Constitution which would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman and will be the only form recognized with in the United States. In my opinion, this brings the discussion to a whole new level, and I thought it warranted a new thread on this specific and important Constitutional issue. It is now outside of the discussion of what to do about it, and now a pro and con issue on Amendment of the US Constitution. Discuss. I will simply state here that I'm in favor of the FMA, as I believe the cornerstone of society is marriage. The government has no compelling interest to officially recognize and sanction any type of relationship other than traditional marriage as it is vital to society for a variety of reasons, including giving the best possible environment for the raising of children, among other things. There is no inherent human right for anyone to marry within the US Constitution, so to prevent further skewing of the law and deconstruction of marriage, the FMA is the only viable alternative to prevent activist courts and radical mayors from simply imposing their own arbitrary will upon the people. Society has the right to dictate recipients of priviledges while not revoking human rights. Marriage is by definiton and societal sanction between a man and a woman only, and society has the right to dictate such. There are no special human rights granted by marriage, only special priviledges. Married persons are recipients of the benefits of the priviledge because their success is vital to the stability of society. KK EDIT: Locking so it can be restarted due to bug in the boards.