I do support a constitutional amendment on marriage between a man and a woman but I would not be going into the states to overturn their state law.

For the life of me I don't understand what honest motive there is in putting this in front of this body to philosophically debate marriage on a constitutional amendment that is not going to happen and which is enormously divisive in all of our communities.

While 45 of the 50 States have either a State constitutional amendment or a statute that preserves the current definition of marriage left-wing activist judges and officials at the local levels have struck down State laws protecting marriage.

The way that same-sex marriage should reach the federal level is that it absolutely should be decided by the Supreme Court as quickly as possible. It's a 14th Amendment issue. There's no argument about it.

Let a man do what he will by a single woman the world is encouragingly apt to think Marriage a sufficient amends.

I opposed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. It should be repealed and I will vote for its repeal on the Senate floor. I will also oppose any proposal to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban gays and lesbians from marrying.

When I started law school I was shocked to learn that our legal system traditionally had the man as the head and master of the family. As late as the '70s and '80s when we were fighting for the Equal Rights Amendment states like Louisiana still had a head and master law.

History has shown us that on extraordinarily rare occasions it becomes necessary for the federal government to intervene on behalf of individuals whose 14th Amendment rights to legal due process and equal protection may be violated by a state.

Our learning ought to be our lives' amendment and the fruits of our private study ought to appear in our public behavior.

Why don't they pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting anybody from learning anything? If it works as well as prohibition did in five years Americans would be the smartest race of people on Earth.

The point is that knowledge of God is not prohibited under the First Amendment.

The 4th Amendment and the personal rights it secures have a long history. At the very core stands the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion.

The 1st Amendment protects the right to speak not the right to spend.

One who comes to the Court must come to adore not to protest. That's the new gloss on the 1st Amendment.

Statutes authorizing unreasonable searches were the core concern of the framers of the 4th Amendment.

I have worked to expand the health care debate beyond the current for-profit system to include a public option and an amendment to free the states to pursue single payer.

It is time we passed a balanced budget amendment and return this government to limited spending.