With Massachusetts set to allow same-sex marriage in May, San Francisco allowing a plethora of same-sex marriages over the weekend and a proposed amendment that would make explicit the definition of marriage in the constitution, the controversy over same-sex marriage has become explosive.

People in the political far right of this country responded to gay marriage by calling for an amendment to the United States Constitution. This outrageous act of discrimination has been disguised as a simple and honest attempt to protect and defend the status of marriage in our country.

I only hope this doesn’t turn into a political move to divert attention from our lackluster economy and trouble facing our country in Iraq. To take this step would be terribly irresponsible of our president. It wasn’t too long ago when laws were on the books preventing a multiethnic marriage.

In fact, it wasn’t until the after the turn of the century — the 21st century, that is — that Alabama removed a clause from its own state constitution forbidding this type of “untraditional” marriage.

Some will argue laws preventing interracial marriage weren’t there to defend marriage. Instead, laws were written to discriminate against nonwhite individuals, and, thus, were different from our current situation. However, as I stated before, defending traditional marriage couldn’t possibly be the real reason for the proposal of a new amendment.

What exactly is traditional marriage? Well, let’s back up a moment. For our country to have traditional marriage, there must be traditional weddings as well. Of course, this idea went out the window a long time ago.

Once drive-up food service became popular, it was only a matter of time before you could be spiritually bonded with your life mate in a similar manner. That’s right folks, for as little as $40, you, too, can be married drive-up style on the Las Vegas strip.

Likewise, marriage has been far from “traditional” for many years. Blacks are marrying whites; old people are marrying young people; Catholics are marrying Protestants. No wonder the status quo sector of our society is in such an uproar.

Reality TV proves this point. Is there anything sacred or traditional about courting a member of the opposite sex before an audience of millions of people?

Since traditional marriage has gone by the wayside, the only possible reason for a call to amend the Constitution is discrimination. If people were truly concerned about defending marriage, their focus should be directed at things such as reality TV, not on people who love each other and wish to be recognized in a way most people take for granted.

Obviously, there are many different opinions on what is appropriate and traditional. Regardless of your viewpoint, why should the federal government try to limit our country to one view in the Constitution? Our Constitution exists to protect the rights and ideas of a diverse population, not this overwhelmingly religious and conservative viewpoint.

For this reason, many conservatives, even those who vehemently oppose gay marriage, do not think an amendment is appropriate.

Former Congressman Bob Barr, a Republican from Georgia, is one example. He was the author of the Marriage Defense Act of 1996, which allows states the freedom to not recognize gay marriages performed in other states.

He prefers to leave the decision on this issue to each individual state, something Vice President Dick Cheney concurred with early on in the Bush administration. At the time, Cheney said, “I don’t think there should necessarily be a federal policy in this area.”

The progressive homosexual movements in our country aren’t taking advantage of an erosion of our ethics. In this case, our ethics are gradually evolving into something morally sound.

If you don’t think I’m right, then let’s just wait and see. Let’s see what happens in Massachusetts. If the allowance of same-sex marriage is going to self-destruct our society, bad things will happen in Massachusetts over the summer. If not, more and more states will adopt similar measures.

We’ve seen this happen with interracial marriage; it will happen with same-sex marriage, too.

This is the reason for the call for a Constitutional amendment. It’s the only way for extremely conservative groups of people to continue their discrimination of homosexuals.