Retarded legislation: Congressional edition

Look at the sponsors of this constitutional amendment introduced in the Senate on Wednesday...

110th CONGRESS

2d Session

S. J. RES. 43

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 25, 2008

Mr. WICKER (for himself, Mr. VITTER, Mr. CRAIG, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. ALLARD, Mr. THUNE, and Mr. SHELBY) introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

---

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission by the Congress:

“ARTICLE —

“ Section 1. This article may be cited as the Marriage Protection Amendment.”

“ Section 2. 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.”.

-------------------------

Yeah because adding your name to a Constitutional amendment that has less than a 0% chance of passing makes up for the sins you have committed in the past...

This smells like hypocrisy, which is actually quite similar to the smell of the men's room in the Minneapolis airport.

Mark Twain put it best when he said: "Congressman is the trivialist distinction for a full grown man."