Donohue Wants Constitutional Amendment Banning Gay Marriage

Bill Donohue, the perpetually outraged and red-faced leader of the Catholic League, is again calling for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution outlawing same-sex marriage nationally because “God got thrown from the mix” when Obama endorsed marriage equality two years ago.

Facing an onslaught of federal courts striking down bans on same-sex marriage, Catholic League President Bill Donohue has called upon Catholics to support a constitutional marriage amendment stating marriage may only be between one man and one woman…

Donohue blamed “unelected judges” and called for Catholics to rise up and “return power to the people.”

“Contrary to what many have said, this issue is not over. Were it not for unelected judges overturning the express will of the people—in state after state—attempts to subvert marriage, properly understood, would not have succeeded,” he wrote. “We need to return power to the people by considering a constitutional amendment. The time is ripe for Catholics to support the efforts of Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, the bishops’ point man on marriage. In February, he called for support of the federal Marriage Protection Amendment.”

Yeah, good luck with that. The amendment couldn’t even get through Congress 10 years ago when the polls showed massive disapproval of same-sex marriage. It has no chance whatsoever of passing now that nearly 60% of Americans support marriage equality.

"It seems at best ambiguous. I suspect a computer model would be necessary to prove ..."

How to Think Critically About the ..."
"As John Pieret noted:The flack jacket is marginally relevant in the sense that, if Franken ..."

How to Think Critically About the ..."
""Ooo, I gotta get my Czar Bombs all over those Mad Mullahs! Israel!" ~ Colnago80, ..."

How to Think Critically About the ..."
"More proof that Trump is the useful idiot of the Conservative movement."

Report: McMaster Called Trump a Childish ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Loqi

    Once you unskew the polls, 280% of Americans actually support the amendment.

  • dingojack

    Ah Bill — as my mother always said: ‘If wishes were horses, beggars would ride’.

    But on second thoughts, perhaps he’s right. Maybe there should be a referendum on the issue. Let the people decide. You’d be in favour of that, right Bill?

    Dingo

  • daved

    Is this “Catholic League” organization anything more than Bill Donohue and his trusty fax machine?

  • John Pieret

    Even if you could get 2/3 of the Senate and House to vote for it, then you have to have 3/4 of the states ratify it. I think there would be at least 13 state legislature that would reject such an amendment. Even Donohue can’t be stupid enough to think this has any chance of passage. He just wants to keep it alive as a political wedge issue, which the Republican party will not be thanking him for if he succeeds in doing so.

  • dingojack

    Fax machine?!? Child of the Devil!!!

    (‘Fax’ sounds suspiciously like some other word you can’t know until you’re properly owned by or owning, someone else!)

    It’s just sad old, demented Bill, and his trusty manual typewriter. (He can’t even attract cats).

    Dingo

  • busterggi

    First they came for the Irish and lost, then for blacks and (after a war) lost, then for the Chinese and lost, then the Jews and lost, then the women and the LGBT community (well that’s still ongoing) and will hopefully lose.

    Conservative Christians slowly watching their batting average drop.

  • Michael Heath

    busterggi writes:

    First they came for the Irish and lost, then for blacks and (after a war) lost, then for the Chinese and lost, then the Jews and lost, then the women and the LGBT community (well that’s still ongoing) and will hopefully lose.

    Conservative Christians slowly watching their batting average drop.

    Yes, but it’s not the only game in town. Conservative Christians can still discriminate against , at least, females and gay people in their churches. They also continue to abuse gay children who are congregants of those same churches.

    Point is, even after we achieve equal protection for gay people’s marriage rights, there’s still a lot of work to be done prior to conservative Christians stop causing human suffering to those they’re bigoted towards.

  • cottonnero

    At least he’s recognizing that that’s what it would take to change the law.

  • whheydt

    Re: John Pieret @ #4…

    You forgot the other way to do the required state ratifications. I’m not surprised, really, the other method has only ever been used successfully once…

  • Chiroptera

    whheydt, #9:

    Well, if you count the ratificiation process for the Constitution itself as well as the process for the 21st amendment, then the state convention process was used successfully twice.

  • http://ingles.homeunix.net/ Ray Ingles

    Were it not for unelected judges overturning the express will of the people

    Actually, the situation is exactly the opposite.

  • eric

    Even if he was successful, I doubt it would have the outcome he wants. The pro-gay side would just go back to the early 00’s proposal of having a separate ‘civil union’ available, with all the same legal and economic benefits but a different name.

  • John Pieret

    whheydt @ 9:

    Yeah, I deliberately left it out because Donohue seemed to be referring to a proposed amendment that was before Congress previously. The other route is no better for him. A constitutional convention called by 2/3 of the states and any proposed amendments again having to be approved by 3/4 of the states.

  • bushrat

    We’ll try this Constitutional Amendment right after Bill Donahue endorses stripping special privileges and protections from priests and preachers, and endorsing full disclosure and prosecution of pedophiles and rapists in Catholic and other Christian religions.

  • dugglebogey

    “God got thrown from the mix” when they ratified the constitution, because it was the right thing to do, and still is.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    When did anybody ever get to vote on who would serve as their bishop?

    Or even to select their Electoral College of Cardinals to pick a pope?

  • lorn

    First they came for the Christians. So the Christians sold out everybody else in return for being the last to go.

  • http://itsmyworldcanthasnotyours.blogspot.com WMDKitty — Survivor

    dingo @5

    (He can’t even attract cats).

    We do have standards, you know!

  • otrame

    He implies pretty strongly that all of the states have had SSM imposed on them by unelected judges. It seems to me that several states actually voted SSM in, either directly through referendums or indirectly through their legislatures or, as in the case of Maryland, both. To quote Mark Twain, “I wonder how he could lie so. The result of practice, no doubt.”

  • sailor1031

    Bill knows there’s already a constitutional amendment covering this – it’s called the “fourteenth amendment”.

    As for “Salvatore Cordileone” – what a phony fucking name. Savior the Lionheart? Bullshit!!!

  • weatherwax

    Last night I got a recorded call from Focus on the Family asking me to vote against the local republican congressional candidate, Carl DeMaio, because he’s gay.

    I wasn’t planning on voting for him, but I was shocked that FotF would do that.

  • dingojack

    sailor1031 – yeah fake names are just so fake!

    😀 Dingojack

    ——————-

    “Salvatore Cordileone”*? “Cuore di pollo” would be closer to the mark I’d say.

    * Wasn’t that the hunchbacked monk out of Name of the Rose?