Bush wants to 'codify' heterosexual unions

[dArKeR]

(Doesn't 'codify' mean Bush wants anal sex with cabinet members? That's what my dictionary says)

U.S. government lawyers are exploring the best way to ensure that marriage remains a contract solely between opposite-sex couples, President George W. Bush said Wednesday.

Questioned during a rare press conference in the White House Rose Garden, he said that while he recognizes the need to welcome "those with good hearts," that shouldn't mean that anyone should be forced to compromise on their religious beliefs.

"I believe in the sanctity of marriage, I believe a marriage is between a man and a woman, and I think we ought to codify that one way or the other," he said. "We've got lawyers looking at the best way to do that."

http://theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030730.wgayy0730/BNStory/International/

http://darkerxdarker.tripod.com/

[Christian73]

1. I think we're all fairly certain by now...

that the president is an asshole.

[foreigncorrespondent]

10. We also know he isn't a man of his word.

During the second presidential debate on October 11th 2000 the moderator of the debate asked this question:

MODERATOR: Do you believe in general terms that gays and lesbians should have the same rights as other Americans?

Bush*s reply to that was:

BUSH: Yes. I don't think they ought to have special rights, but I think they ought to have the same rights.

I have to ask where are those mystical equal rights that asswipe claims we should have?

link: http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2000b.html

You can find that quote about half way down the page.

[BillyMcLibertarian]

2. Codify? Does that mean

that now people will have to break the code in order to enter into heterosexual marriages?

[foreigncorrespondent]

11. Basically...

...it means a collection of laws.

But what he means by it, is anyones guess.

[BillyMcLibertarian]

12. Yeah, I knew what codify meant...

I was just trying to be funny. Guess I wasn't that successful, huh? :+

[Fovea]

3. What meaningless twaddle

Like a bunch of Klansmen haveing a rally in front of the FBI headquarters... nothing but double negative speak and obsfucation...

"that shouldn't mean that anyone should be forced to compromise on their religious beliefs."

Perhaps we mean to say that we might be speaking in metaphors, when we refer to a church burning tonight... :puke:

[umcwb]

4. At which point he tucked tail and ran back to Crawford.....

after seeing todays poll numbers.


Shrub's got us after him on the left, and his fanatical base after him on the right.

Hope you enjoyed playing President, Georgie!

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RetroLounge]

6. Why should that bother you?

eom

[BillyMcLibertarian]

7. Seriously...What's the difference

between a gay couple adopting a child, and a couple who can't have babies of their own adopting a child? If the child is going to be loved and well-cared for, why should it matter what gender the people are?

[Adamocrat]

8. OK...

There are MILLIONS of children in state homes DESPERATE for someone to adopt them. My partner and I have a great home, we're stable, and we're very happy. How can my home be worse than a state home (i.e. an orphanage)? Please, please, please explain this to me.

My partner (my homosexual, funky, butt-lovin' partner) is an adopted child. His mother has stated several times that were he any race other than white, they wouldn't have adopted him. Most of the gay men out there do not care what race their children are, they just want to be parents.

I really can't wait to hear back from you about this.

Welcome to DU.

Cheers,
ADAM

[foreigncorrespondent]

13. But what is the problem...

...in a gay couple adopting a child, and giving that child a secure home? Yes, gay homes are just as secure (if not more so) than a straight home.

Gay people have to fight for their rights, which straight take for granted. When we enter into a relationship 99% of the time it will remain monogymous. Yet the diovorce rate amongst straight couples is high, and the main reason divorce happens is due to one half of the couple being unfaithful.

Is it fair to a child to allow a couple to adopt that child, only to have the couple fall apart down the track? Or is it fair to a child to put that child in a home with two loving parents and no fights?

[SuffragetteSal]

14. Really...Don'tBbushNMe

Are you willing to adopt all those 'hard to place' children? I bet not.

Let them adopt as many as they like.

[PartyPooper]

16. Tell that to Rosie O'Donnell

and thousands of other gay and lesbian parents of adopted children! All of these folks have been providing loving and nurturing homes to children. In many cases, these children were difficult cases to place for adoption-because of age, race, and special needs. In short, nobody else wanted these kids!

If my partner and I were younger, we would want to adopt. We've been together 30 years. And, when we got together this concept for gays and lesbians was virtually unheard of. So, we've only had pets to share our love...but, we both would have loved children, too!

I say, let gays and lesbians adopt! Don't allow yourself to selfishly dismiss 'gay adoption'. Rather, think about the life a child who might be saved from an otherwise miserable childhood and hopeless future. Remember, it's about the child and NOT you!

[Thor_MN]

9. CNN's version

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/30/bush.gay.marriage/index.html

"On the other hand, that does not mean that somebody like me needs to compromise on an issue such as marriage."

WTF!!!!

You complete total ignorant arrogant asshole!!!! You represent the people, not your own personal psychological defects. You are EXACTLY the person who has to compromise - you must set aside your petty fetishes until we vote your ass out of town. (again.)

[davidinalameda]

15. lock dupe

please continue here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=42456&mesg_id=42456

thanks

dwickham