Clear as mud

--- Kennedy_Response@kennedy.senate.gov wrote:
Dear Mr. ____:
Thank you for your letter on the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment
to the Constitution. I share your concerns, and I appreciate this
opportunity to respond.
I oppose the Federal Marriage Amendment. In more than two hundred
years of our history, we have amended the Constitution only seventeen times
since the adoption of the Bill of Rights. Many of the amendments have been
adopted to expand and protect people’s rights. By preventing states from
granting the legal benefits of marriage to same-sex couples, the proposed
Federal Marriage Amendment would restrict individual rights and undermine
our nation’s commitment to treating all people equally under the law.
Many people are concerned that the government may somehow interfere
with the right of their churches and religious groups to conduct their own
affairs. But as the First Amendment makes clear, no court and no state can
tell any church or religious group how to conduct its own affairs. Far
from upholding religious freedom, the Federal Marriage Amendment would
undermine it, by telling churches they can’t consecrate a same-sex
marriage, even though some churches are now doing so. The amendment would
flagrantly interfere with the decisions of local faith communities, and it
threatens the longstanding separation of church and state in our society.
Supporters of the amendment claim that same-sex marriages in one
state must be recognized in all other states, but that claim is not true.
States have broad discretion in deciding to what extent they will defer to
other states when dealing with sensitive questions about marriage and
raising families. Across the country, states are clearly dealing with the
issue and doing so effectively, according to the wishes of the citizens in
each of the 50 states. If it’s not necessary to amend the Constitution,
it’s necessary not to amend it.
Our nation has made extraordinary progress in the battle for civil
rights. The Federal Marriage Amendment would be an unjustified step
backwards, and I oppose it.
Thank you for again for contacting me on this important issue.
Sincerely,
Edward M. Kennedy