Another election, another attempt to divide the country on a gay marriage ammendment

Ikohn4ever

CAGiversary!
Feedback
5 (100%)
Bush urges gay marriage ban enshrined in Constitution
Critics say amendment is appeasement to conservative base

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush on Saturday backed a resolution to amend the Constitution to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman even though the idea has little chance of being passed in the Senate.

"Ages of experience have taught us that the commitment of a husband and a wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society," Bush said in his Saturday radio address. "Marriage cannot be cut off from its cultural, religious and natural roots without weakening this good influence on society."

Democrats say Senate floor time is being wasted on the issue, and accuse Republicans of making a pre-midterm election appeal to social conservatives whose votes were key to Bush's re-election.

This November, initiatives banning same-sex marriages are expected to be on the ballot in Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin.
Reverend: 'Election year politics'

"Sadly, President Bush is playing election-year politics with this divisive issue," the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said Friday. "He is shamelessly using this ploy to energize his right-wing base. We should never rewrite the Constitution to enshrine intolerance."

The White House said Bush did not devote his radio address to the issue or decide to host a presidential event Monday to again endorse the amendment because it is politically expedient, but because there's a vote on it scheduled next week in the Senate.

"On Monday, I will meet with a coalition of community leaders, constitutional scholars, family and civic organizations and religious leaders," Bush said in urging Congress to pass the amendment and send it to the states for ratification. "They're Republicans, Democrats and independents who've come together to support this amendment."

The amendment would prohibit states from recognizing same-sex marriages. To become law, the proposal would need two-thirds support in the Senate and House, and then would have to be ratified by at least 38 state legislatures.

Bush said the amendment would fully protect marriage from being redefined, while leaving state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage.
Passage unlikely

It stands little chance of passing the 100-member Senate, where proponents are struggling to get even 50 votes. Several Republicans oppose the measure, and so far only one Democrat -- Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska -- has said he will vote for it.

Acknowledging that emotions often run hot in this debate, Bush urged calm.

"As this debate goes forward, we must remember that every American deserves to be treated with tolerance, respect and dignity," he said. "All of us have a duty to conduct this discussion with civility and decency toward one another, and all people deserve to have their voices heard."

David Buckel, Marriage Project director of Lambda Legal, a national organization working to protect the rights of lesbians, gay men and others, said the amendment would be damaging to the lives of same-sex couples and families, which raise millions of children.

"It would brand lesbian and gay men as legally inferior individuals," he said. "It would write into the supreme law of the land that this group of people are inferior and when it's the law, it's a message to everyone else in society that they have license to discriminate."

In his radio address, Bush struck back at judges who have overturned state laws similar in intent to the proposed legislation.

"Unfortunately, activist judges and some local officials have made an aggressive attempt to redefine marriage in recent years," the president said.

Bush said there is broad consensus in America to protect the institution of marriage.

Voters in 19 states have approved amendments to their state constitutions that protect the traditional definition of marriage, he said. Moreover, he said, 45 of the 50 states have either a state constitutional amendment or statute defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.


http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/03/bush.radio.ap/index.html


sigh, i really hope someone calls them out for this charade
 
Even though I'm gay, I don't support any type of marriage as a legal term at all. Shit, there are many straight couples that lived together for many years and become common law marriages and everything works out perfectly. But as soon as they say "I do", everything goes down hill and life for them becomes shitty. Stuff like this is totally pathetic. There are more important things to worry about and concern ourselves with than something such as this
 
I think that there ought to be a national vote on an issue so blatantly used to be divisive as this. I have a few provisions, of course:

(1) Anyone who has ever been divorced is prohibited from voting on this piece of legislation. If Newt Gingrich, to use one example, could not uphold the vow of fidelity he promised to his first wife, or even his SECOND wife, well, then he's not the kind of person who deserves to decide if marriage is sacred.

(2) Any vote for BANNING gay marriage should also be a vote for eliminating laws permitting divorce (even the old ones, pre-20th century, when divorce was only allowed in cases of the wife's infidelity). If marriage is a sacred bond, then divorce will not be allowed period. Domestic abuse? Cheating on you? Drug, crime, or money problems? 'til death do you part, tough guy. *

*As a result of this law, and in order to restore a modicum of reverence for marriage as a sacred institution, the federal government will hire 150 people to serve as its first "Department of Marital Security." Their task will be to take divorced peoples and reunite them. Second, third, ninth, and any subsequent marriages will be legally revoked, and people will be forcibly placed with their first spouse. Since we want to have respect for marriage, after all, the only way that a person is allowed to get remarried is, of course, if their first spouse dies.

Because marriage isn't just 'one man and one woman.' It's "one man and the first woman he marries, and only her, for fucking EVER." It lacks the bumper sticker pizazz of the 700 Club bumper sticker I've seen, but it's more accurate. Or, rather, it is if you have any respect for the institute of marriage.
 
Why discriminate? Gay/Lesbian/Straight it doesn't matter. They should all be able to experiance the misery.. err joy of marriage. :cool:
 
Funny how the GOP wait until 5 months before the next election to bring this up. But alas, the right-wing conservative base isn't even fooled by this charade:

WASHINGTON -- The campaign against gay marriage is scheduled to get the administration's special treatment on Monday -- words from President Bush at the White House, an array of VIPs assembled to hear him, a bank of television cameras on hand to broadcast the proceedings.

Such marquee billing aims to confer the grandeur of the office on the push for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. But even before administration officials announced the event, some of the invitees, far from swooning at the honor, denounced it as a sham.

"I'm going to go and hear what he says, but we already know it is a ruse," said Joe Glover, president of the Family Policy Network, which opposes gay marriage. "We're not buying it. We're going to go and watch the dog-and-pony show, (but) it's too little, too late."

Such comments have raised the prospect that the debate on gay marriage -- designed to galvanize one of Bush's most important constituencies, social conservatives -- could instead exacerbate the president's political headaches....


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...3jun03,0,5316780.story?coll=la-home-headlines
 
:lol:

Just like a broken record. I'm glad these guys are tackling the REAL issues instead of record deficits, New Orleans rebuilding, rising identity theft, the iraq war, etc.. No, we need to concentrate on prosecuting all 5 people that burn U.S. flags.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I think that there ought to be a national vote on an issue so blatantly used to be divisive as this. I have a few provisions, of course:

(1) Anyone who has ever been divorced is prohibited from voting on this piece of legislation. If Newt Gingrich, to use one example, could not uphold the vow of fidelity he promised to his first wife, or even his SECOND wife, well, then he's not the kind of person who deserves to decide if marriage is sacred.

(2) Any vote for BANNING gay marriage should also be a vote for eliminating laws permitting divorce (even the old ones, pre-20th century, when divorce was only allowed in cases of the wife's infidelity). If marriage is a sacred bond, then divorce will not be allowed period. Domestic abuse? Cheating on you? Drug, crime, or money problems? 'til death do you part, tough guy. *

*As a result of this law, and in order to restore a modicum of reverence for marriage as a sacred institution, the federal government will hire 150 people to serve as its first "Department of Marital Security." Their task will be to take divorced peoples and reunite them. Second, third, ninth, and any subsequent marriages will be legally revoked, and people will be forcibly placed with their first spouse. Since we want to have respect for marriage, after all, the only way that a person is allowed to get remarried is, of course, if their first spouse dies.

Because marriage isn't just 'one man and one woman.' It's "one man and the first woman he marries, and only her, for fucking EVER." It lacks the bumper sticker pizazz of the 700 Club bumper sticker I've seen, but it's more accurate. Or, rather, it is if you have any respect for the institute of marriage.[/quote]

There's another word for this: Catholicism.
 
[quote name='camoor']There's another word for this: Catholicism.[/QUOTE]

Get over yourself. It's easier to get annulled in your church than it is for an altar boy to be fondled.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Get over yourself. It's easier to get annulled in your church than it is for an altar boy to be fondled.[/quote]

I guess it depends on which country you're in. Americans are really close to a schism anyway - I remember Rumsfeld and a bunch of sympathizers used to stand up for the entire mass in my folk's church to protest that women couldn't become priests, and as a whole the congregation was surprisingly liberal (with the exception of abortion). If the church wasn't so browbeaten over the publicity of their lies and deceits, I'm sure the Papacy would have brought the issue of rogue Catholics to a head. It's all damn politics anyway - which I believe has no place in spirituality.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Get over yourself. It's easier to get annulled in your church than it is for an altar boy to be fondled.[/QUOTE]

I gotta say, I roffled at that. Good job, myke.
 
[quote name='Elrod']Next up: An ammendment to ban flag burning!

Seriously![/QUOTE]

Yep, this comes up every so often. Like many other Americans, an amendment banning flag burning is pretty much the only thing that would ever make me do it.
 
[quote name='ElwoodCuse']Yep, this comes up every so often. Like many other Americans, an amendment banning flag burning is pretty much the only thing that would ever make me do it.[/QUOTE]

QFT. Why some dumbass wants to make me hold sacred a piece of cloth is beyond me. Sure I respect the flag, but it's an inanimate object, get over it.

I wonder if anyone has used this argument for the far-right people who support a flag burning amendment:

4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
 
bread's done
Back
Top