The marriage vow pledge which Rep. Bachmannn signed seems in some ways contradictory. It demands rejection of Sharia Islam, but would staunchly support new regulation for fidelity to one’s spouse, and respect for the marriage bonds of others. An interpretation then is that the pledge might enforce some strong punishment for moral turpitude, which is precisely the sort of thing students around the world are fighting and dying to oppose. We recognize that ancient societies mixed legal and moral considerations into their legislations; many in the world are trying to end the stoning and hanging of promiscuous citizens, while evangelical candidates right here in the United States are moving gradually but surely in the direction of government enforcement of religious principles.
As to the earlier mentioned protection of service personnel (the Vander Plaats pledge does use the word “attracteds” and suggests the unwanted harassment may take place in restrooms, showers, barracks, tents, and so on), we find constraints for women serving in foreign countries, because they could become subject to torture, enslavement, or sexual leveraging.
Lastly, the pledge in question specifically mentions a “Fierce defense of the First Amendment's rights of Religious Liberty and Freedom of Speech” in anticipation of unstated agencies that might “undermine law-abiding American citizens and institutions of faith and conscience for their adherence to, and defense of, faithful heterosexual monogamy.”
In a nation that advocates a clean separation of church and state, Bachmannn again and again seems to be running for the position of the Creator's representative on Earth. This, she doesn’t seem to recognize, goes back to ancient times in societies that became cruel, even barbaric, and failed. The young lady should probably dedicate herself more to the conventional legal attributes of the office, and leave the legislation of morality to the church goers and those entrenched in the pulpit.