The measure reads: “Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman.” 

Abercrombie said:

“This ban would be almost unique among constitutional amendments, because it curtails rather than expands individual rights and liberties.  The sole exception was the 18^th amendment, which brought us the ‘noble experiment’ of prohibition.  Prohibition was repealed a short time later, because it proved to be an utter failure both in terms of enforceability and of elevating the nation’s moral tone.

“Marriage and civil unions have always been and rightfully remain the province of individual states.  Asserting a Federal power to regulate marriage is only a short step away from claiming Federal authority to govern every other aspect of family life—divorce, child support, inheritance, child rearing, etc.

“The U.S. Constitution is the underlying document which: (1) serves as the basic blueprint for the operation of the Federal government; and (2) defines the balance of powers and rights among the national government, states, and individuals.  To drag the Constitution into areas beyond those fundamentals is to trivialize the basic document of our freedom.  

“That prospect is why the founders made changing the Constitution much more difficult than passing statutory law.  Amendments must pass each house of Congress by a two-thirds margin and be ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states.   This is a formidable hurdle, and rightly so.  Amending the Constitution because of changes in the political weather endangers the stability of the country and embedded protections for minorities that have served the nation well.”

-30-