A few weeks ago a friend sent me an e-mail asking me to sign a petition opposing the Federal Marriage Amendment. When I received this e-mail, I was surprised, since I had never heard of any Federal Marriage Amendment and I generally am well-informed on current events. It turns out that a coalition of Christian and conservative groups have proposed an amendment to the constitution that reads: "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this constitution or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups." Congress is currently debating the amendment.

This is a huge deal. This is an amendment to our constitution, not simply a law or act. It intends to place within the framework upon which this nation is founded a clause stating that people of the same sex have no right to marry each other. I find that disturbing. But what is even more disturbing, regardless of one’s opinions on same-sex marriage, is the complete lack of attention this issue has gotten in the media. A proposed amendment is a proposal to change the principles of the United States. It should be discussed and debated in the newspapers, on TV and on college campuses. People should be informed of this possible change. Yet none of this is happening. Almost no one is even aware that this amendment has been proposed. The issue has been almost completely ignored by the media, and therefore most people remain ignorant.

One might argue that this is understandable, given the September 11 terrorist attacks and the "war on terrorism" that followed. These more pressing matters have preoccupied the media, and therefore it has been unable to grant extensive coverage to other issues. Once things calm down, we can return to debating issues such as the Federal Marriage Amendment. The problem with this argument is that our leaders in Washington are not preoccupied and are not waiting until things calm down. Congress is currently debating the amendment.

President George W. Bush has continued to push for opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil development. This effort, however, has not been brought to the attention of the American public, and therefore Bush faces much less negative publicity as he tries to pass this controversial measure. One might even conclude that many of our leaders are taking advantage of our war in the Middle East to help them pass their pet projects.

In theory, it would be completely acceptable and even desirable for our leaders to continue to develop and pass legislation while we are at war. The problem is that the public needs to be aware of that legislation and its implications, at least as much as it is during peacetime. If not, the workings of our government develop an aspect of secrecy that can become dangerous. Consider the recent anti-terrorism bill that recently passed both houses of congress with lightning speed. Part of this bill stated that law enforcement and intelligence agencies could tap the phones and track the internet use of suspected terrorists. When you think about how often "suspected terrorist" has been taken to mean a person of Middle Eastern heritage, this new legislation is really frightening. Yet there has been neither mention of these aspects of the bill, nor questioning of how we can ensure our civil liberties in the face of this new legislation. In fact, it is difficult to even find anything about the anti-terrorism bill in the mainstream media.

Another worrisome development is the dramatic increase in President Bush’s approval ratings. Before September 11, the percentage of Americans who approved of the job Bush has done was hovering around 50 percent, but afterwards it suddenly rose to 88 percent. This is strange because Bush hasn’t changed his views or agenda in any way. The only change is that he has declared "war on terrorism" and bombed Afghanistan. Yet, now that we are fighting a war, the majority of Americans no longer believe they should be critical of their president. This is a huge mistake. If anything, we should be more critical during wartime, since now our government is wielding massive power, both here and abroad, in the name of our "war on terrorism." It is difficult, though, to maintain a critical view of our leadership when all the information we get are glowing reports of "Operation Enduring Freedom," and warnings that terrorists could strike at any minute.

Hopefully, this war will be over soon, and the current complacency surrounding our government’s decisions will evaporate. No matter how long it lasts, though, we as a nation need to remain aware of what is going on inside our country. Otherwise, a few years from now, when the news stations stop replaying that one shot of U.S. bombs hitting a strategic target, we will all wonder why there is a Federal Marriage Amendment banning same sex marriages, oil development in our wildlife refuges and an extremely subjective standard of who is a suspected terrorist. That would be truly disturbing.