GOP leaders are putting gay marriage back on the agenda.

[Cannikin]

Politics of the Altar

June 12, 2006 issue - Back in 2004, suburban Seattle pastor Alec Rowlands watched with dismay as gay couples in Massachusetts flocked to courthouses and churches, exchanged vows and walked away legally wed. Now he worries a similar scenario could unfold in his own backyard. Last year, the Washington State Supreme Court heard arguments in two gay-marriage cases of its own; a decision is expected soon. In Massachusetts, an obscure law allows only state residents to wed. But Washington has no residency requirements. So if the justices approve gay marriage—as many on both sides of the issue predict—courthouse doors would swing open to gay couples across the nation. "We will become the Las Vegas for same-sex marriage," frets Rowlands.

Just two years ago, gay-marriage opponents like Rowlands were everywhere. Thirteen states passed constitutional amendments barring same-sex unions and, in Ohio, the marriage ban was widely credited with boosting turnout and propelling George W. Bush to a second term. But after Election Day, the issue faded. Now it's back, complete with all the activists, dire predictions and dueling poll numbers. But the landscape has changed since 2004. Democrats argue that gay marriage is just a diversion from rising gas prices, the ongoing struggle in Iraq and immigration reform. With so much else to worry about, will voters care?

This week Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist will again bring the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) up for a vote; the House could weigh in next month. Though it isn't expected to pass either House, supporters want to get pols on the record before November. "It's a way to build momentum," says FMA author Matt Daniels, president of the Alliance for Marriage. Bush himself had been mostly mum on gay marriage since his re-election. But now, with his poll numbers in a nose dive and even his most enthusiastic supporters grousing, Bush took up the cause in his radio address Saturday; an amendment is needed because "activist courts have left our nation with no other choice," he explained. The president also plans to address amendment supporters in the Old Executive Office Building on Monday.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13121953/site/newsweek/

[Aiptasia]

1. Of course, gotta drum up support from the old fundie base

Did you expect anything different out of these freaks? Oh sure they love freedom, just nobody else's freedom. Freedom to legislate against minority groups. Freedom to deny their own fellow Americans equal rights and protections under the law.

[Mutley]

2. You knew that was going to happen.

They only make an issue of this during election years.

[billyskank]

4. I suppose they'll keep doing it as long as it keeps working

:(

[Mutley]

7. *Sigh*

Yes, I suppose the same. :(

[Oeditpus Rex]

3. Terra! Terra! Terra!

Marriage! Marriage! Marriage!

What about the children?!? :scared:

[YellowRubberDuckie]

5. Does this mean a homosexual is responsible for Bush's marriage crumbling?

:shrug:

[caty]

6. Are they really that afraid that gay marriage will

turn them gay????:banghead: Must be terrible to be that insecure in their own sexuality.