Bush Plans To Back Marriage Amendment

[Manix]

<snip>


President Bush plans to endorse a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as the union of a man and a woman in response to a Massachusetts court decision requiring legal recognition of gay marriages in that state, key advisers said yesterday.



Washington Post

[Reverend_Smitty]

1. knock me over with a feather

Well I can't say that I am surprised to hear that. One day the government will butt out of people's business...but I guess one day is not today

[rumguy]

2. Bring it on bitch-boy Bush (awol sack of shit!)

It will show how black and miserable your heart really is...

[baby_bear]

7. The libertarians are going to get fed up with this I think

Between the Patriot Act and the Republicans wanting to control sexuality, I think the libertarians -- who all voted for Bush last time because he ostensibly represented small government -- may bolt from the stable.

I have a libertarian friend who is desperately trying to figure out ways to justify his continued support of the Bushistas, but secretly I think he is running dry.

My question is, how do we bring the libertarians over to the Democrats without humiliating them? I know my friend doesn't want to admit I was right about Bush. OK, I don't need that. But I sure would like to encourage him to vote for the party of fiscal responsibility and civil rights.

s_m

[Prodemsouth]

10. If they are like every "libertarian" I have ever talked to they will find

away to justify it. They didn't say a fucking thing about the patriot act- they were as meek as the Dems when Bush used the Bill of Rights as toliet paper. Atleast the Dems could say we don't want people thinking we are weak on terrorism. The Libertarians didn't do shit when they had nothing to lose. Most libertarians-are Republicans who think its not cool to say they are Republicans-so they use "libertarian"

[Prodemsouth]

3. He now knows he is going to face Kerry- so he is going to use this to

give voters a clear choice. It will work and he will be reelected -unless everything else; the economy, Iraq war get much worse. most Americans support this- and even many Americans who say they don't care if gays get married like Dennis Miller-will say they are against this issue but will still support Bush anyway because of the "war on terror." The ground work is being laid. Look for this to pass- That is why I said the Mass court didn't do Gays any favor. This is a fight they will win.

[KissMyAsscroft]

6. You are right...

Kerry is going to have to go along with this and gays are just going to have to choose Kerry anyway with the implied understanding that he is much better for them than Bush.

I realize that gay people are going to be upset by this but they need to think of what their "rights" will be like if we have 20 more Republican years.

[Prodemsouth]

16. Kerry voted against the Defense of Marriage act- in 96 which lets the

issue go to the states- They will be able to make the charge that "Kerry is to the left of Dean on gay marriage" because Dean said it is up to the states and Kerry voted against that.

[UnAmericanJoe]

4. He's desperate

Rove can't stop the bleeding and he's worried.

Bush would never commit to such a divisive issue before the election unless he was VERY worried about his base.

They are weak. Very weak.

[Prodemsouth]

8. You are right to some degree- he has to have an issue - but divisive

as this is - the bigger, make that the much bigger, slice of the pie is with Bush on this one. Strange to compare the two but since Janet Jackson at the Super Bowl the "moral" or "family" issues are getting new attention now- and unless the economy gets really really bad or the war gets much worse- this will help Bush out and I see the rational for, pardon the expression, coming out for this amend., it is a good political move if your Bush.

[keopeli]

21. I'd not worry about the "moral" issue with broadcasters...it will be...

a non-issue in a year.

Keo

[Vickers]

5. Seems like that would interfere with the 10th Amendment

Since the federal government doesn't actually administer anything to do with actually getting folks married, a state's laws should apply.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

[Calico4000]

11. Nope

With an amendment this (legalized same sex marriage) will be a power prohibited to both the fed and state govs. New amendments override any previous section of the constitution when in conflict as well.

Nothing to worry about though. It will never pass. Unless we have MASSIVE defections in the senate (read: dems stab us in the back royally) it will never even pass the national congress.

[PartyPooper]

9. Maybe my partner of 31 years and I will go to Canada to get hitched.

Then we'll return to the States. Then what? Will we be banned?
Will we be kept from resuming our lives? Will we be ostracised?

I know we won't be given the same legal status and provided with equal tax / survivor benefits as heteros. So, what else is new?

But, I'd still love to come back to the USA "married"!

Perhaps there's even a bumper sticker for folks like us: "Marriage is between two people who love each other!"

O8)

[Calico4000]

17. I could swear

The US has a treaty or two (probably with Canada) that provides each nation will recognize marriages perfomed in the other. Since a treaty has the same power as a federal law I wonder if perhaps a same sex couple (US citizens) married in Canada should bring it to the courts on those grounds....

[stevedeshazer]

12. This will never happen...

Okay, I said this about Reagan being elected president, but hear me out.

From the Constitution:

Article. V.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is a bogus issue. I'm not saying the Republicans won't use it; but the likelihood that 2/3rds of BOTH Houses of Congress and thirty-eight states would vote for this anytime soon is extremely unlikely.

[Calico4000]

18. There are 4 ways to amend the consitution

I believe one of them (OR, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments) totally eliminates the national congress from the process. The national congress does NOT have to be involved. 2/3rds of the states can call for a convention independent of the national congress.

I find this even more unlikely than the amendment passing the national congress, however. I have a hard time accepting that kind of organization between the states to pass this amendment.

[maggrwaggr]

13. Go right ahead, Bush! HA!

this will backfire on Shrubco big time

[countmyvote4real]

14. I think * needs a Queer Eye makeover.

I take it back. I don't want him more electable.

Still, it's something I'd like to see on SNL or Mad TV.

[AZCat]

15. The WH/RW is using this to change the focus of the election

They want the election to be on "Family Values" again, and this is part of their shift. This, the Janet 'boob' thing, hmm... what else?

[Prodemsouth]

19. You called it and people are pissed about the Janet Jackson at the

Super Bowl event. That is why I think people here should not dismiss the chances of this passing. California voted for Knight, why do you people think this will not pass?

[keopeli]

20. Hoorah!

At this point, I believe that everything that Bush* touches from here forward will turn against him and the Republican Party. He now has the touch of death for any policy or for endorsements. I realize this is a prediction, but this is when you make them, right? When you first perceive them?

His high point was landing on that carrier, and his State of the Union speech was the beginning of the end.

Hoorah!

(Don't get on me for being an optimist. I'm normally a strong pessimist.)

Keo

[The Zanti Regent]

22. Now, WHAT does Andy Sullivan have to say about this?

Andy, you can only make so many excuses!

[scarface2004]

23. what about moose and squirrel?

gee bullwinkle..what are we gonna do now??

[countmyvote4real]

24. *smack* (big kiss on the lips)

Very funny and subversive response. I love it.