Talk:Federal Marriage Amendment
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Federal Marriage Amendment article.|
|Archives: 1, 2|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Editors: please read Wikipedia:Guidelines for controversial articles
|The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Please supply full citations when adding information, and consider tagging or removing unciteable information.|
|Discussions on this page may escalate into heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here. See also: Wikipedia:Etiquette.|
Protection of conjugal marriage
"FMA proponents argue that opposite-sex marriage in the United States has been given special legal protection. This protection has historically been granted only to the unique institution of marriage as the cradle for the family and to legitimize lines of inheritance. Proponents of the Federal Marriage Amendment argue that same-sex marriage advocates want to disregard federalism and enact same-sex marriage nationwide via judicial fiat, then the Federal Marriage Amendment is necessary to protect the institution of conjugal marriage by nationally preventing other forms of marriage."
Can we please put something in this section about the separation of powers? I'm so tired of seeing this stupid argument without any context. Judges only do their jobs. There is no "imposing" or "activism" going on here. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 13:13, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
- Neither of those words are in the text you quoted. More importantly, that section is specifically given an argument in favor. From many advocates' point of view, the concept of "judicial fiat" does exist. Naturally, this is disputed, just like the proposed amendment itself. Superm401 - Talk 00:52, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Bullet in wrong place?
- I've removed it entirely, since it has no source (for over a year). Unfortunately, the page in general is low on sources, but I think this is a border-line argument to begin with. In my opinion, most supporters and opponents are probably not talking much about it. Feel free to put it back in if you find a source. Superm401 - Talk 00:55, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
According to govtrack, I can only find four articles with that title: 2 bills each for the house and the senate and all of them are much older than 2008.
a RFC arguing that the term "traditional marriage", as used in discussions of marriage in western, predominantly/historically christian, countries -- and, specifically, the United States -- is not a neutral term and should not be used without explanation/contextualization, has been logged on the Traditional marriage Talk page.
the term "traditional marriage" is not a neutral term when it is used by advocates of a certain position in regards to the Federal Marriage Amendment, it refers to the evangelical christian concept of "traditional marriage", which is between one man and one woman -- usually permenantly, until death. globally, however, there are myriad forms of "traditonal marriage"... therefore, it is imperative that wikipedia -- as a global, neutral source -- specify precisely what is meant when the phrase "traditional marriage" is used to advance a very narrow point-of-view, which implies that orthodox christian marriage is the "default", "normal" and "immutable" familial arrangement for all...
the meaning and connotations of the phrase "traditional marriage" when used in U.S.-specific controversies, such as the Federal Marriage Amendment are only self-evident to those who live in cultures where the term "traditional" equals a very specific understanding of "christianity"... if this article -- and any other article that refer to "traditional marriage" where what is meant is a "traditional christian definition of marriage" -- is to be truly neutral and universally understood, it is imperative that the term "traditional marriage" either be explained/contextualized, or replaced by an alternate term, such as:
- traditional Christian definition of marriage
- orthodox Christian definition of marriage
note that the term "orthodox Christian definition of marriage", might be an acceptable neutral alternative, as there are an ever-increasing number of christian denominations who have expanded their understanding of marriage...
the wikipedia entry for "traditional marriage" provides a rock-solid basis for a wiki-wide consideration of a nomenclature change/clarification when the term "treaditional marriage" is used in a U.S.-specific context... oedipus (talk) 23:04, 11 March 2013 (UTC)