GOP isn't united behind ban on gay marriage

[MurikanDemocrat]

GOP isn't united behind ban on gay marriage

Congressional leaders cautious on Bush's call for amendment

WASHINGTON - President Bush wants quick election-year enactment of a constitutional amendment prohibiting gays from marrying each other, but Republicans in Congress are not rushing to heed his call.

After Bush’s announcement Tuesday, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, said it would take time to gauge the level of support in Congress for a constitutional amendment. He suggested the difficulty of passing one may cause lawmakers to take a different approach to preserving marriage as a solely man-woman union.

“We don’t want to do this in haste,” DeLay said.

<snip>

Rep. David Dreier, R-Calif., a co-chairman of Bush’s campaign in California in 2000, said he doesn’t support a constitutional amendment. “I believe that this should go through the courts, and I think that we’re at a point where it’s not necessary,” he said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4360783/

[RobertSeattle]

1. Gee, wonder why Dreier would be against it?

:evilgrin:

BTW - Have any RW Talk show hosts come out against it? Usually when we have one of these Wedge issue at least one of them goes against the grain - like the guy from Colorado who thought he RW stance on Elian Gonzales was stupid.

[LynneSin]

2. This whole amendment thing is an election ploy

Bush knows that the anti-gay amendment will divide the country and help win him votes in swing states like West Virginia, Tennessee and some other battleground states in the south and midwest.

I've read several times that there probably won't be a debate on this issue until 2005. So what Bush is doing is coming out and supporting the anti-gay amendment which will force the democratic candidate to do one of 2 things:

1. Come out 100% against the amendment. Then the Karl Rove machine will spin this to death in those battlefield states helping make this a single issue that'll force people to vote against the democrat
   
2. Waffle on the issue: That way Rove can spin this as the democrat is waffling on an issue and who knows what the dem candidate will spring on us
   

This whole 'endorsement' by Bush stinks highly of a campaign manuever. Now we'll have the churches preaching about the ills of same-sex marriage and folks will be voting on this issue instead of real issues like the economy & jobs

I hate what they've done, how do we fight this and not lose states where this could be a voting issue against any candidate that supports same-sex marriages?

[mot78]

11. * is the one who's waffled on this issue

He was against the amendmant until recently.

[BL_Zebub]

3. Has Drudge had a comment on the issue yet?

You think Matt would have the balls to claim support for this blatant fascism given his "not exactly well kept secret"?

[RobertSeattle]

4. Drudge in a Relatioship?

The only commiited, passionate relationship Drudge has is with his own ego.

[Virginian]

5. Amendments to the Constitution

As I read them, the Constitutional amendments either grant rights or they change or clear up the rules on the elected offices at the federal level.

The only Amendment to the Constitution I see that specifically denies a privilege (also catered to the religious right)is Prohibition (Amendment xviii 1919) which was repealed by Amendment XXI 1933.


So if Congress passes an Amendment on marriage, I think there should also be one that states No one with the last name of Bush or descended from a person with the last name of Bush shall ever again be eligible to run for the office of POTUS.

Now, back to the economy and the outsourcing of jobs. What ever happened to the 9/11 investigation? To heck with Janet Jackson's exposure, was anyone ever indicted for treason in the Valerie Plame exposure? Where was GWB when he was supposed to show up for National Guard duty? Why is Ken Lay still free and Martha Stewart is on trial? What is the link between the Bushes and bin Ladens? Why does Scott Peterson get so much more press than the presidential candidates? What is the White House hiding this week that we should know?

[leodem]

6. What's up with Dreier?

I've heard he's a big time closet case... reasoning for him to be against the amendment? I don't think worrying about votes is an issue, isn't his district a pretty conservative area of California?

[MurikanDemocrat]

7. I doubt that's Drier's reasoning

Conservatives are generally against such drastic action like amending the Constituion.

To be honest, I think consevatives know this is a political hot potato that could backfire ont them, and they really don't want to push it.

[leodem]

8. I get that feeling already...

I was worried at first that this was going to give them the election, but now it seems like people are getting fed up with the talk about gay marriages and I think it already is backfiring. I'm seeing more and more positive responces in regards to gay marriages from non religious right people these days.

[GreenArrow]

10. Republicans have gay kids too

Right wing fundy Repubs aren't going to vote Democrat under any circumstances, but more moderate and libertarian Republicans will support a more practical approach to this issue--civil unions. Just because they are Republicans doesn't mean they don't love their kids,and want them to be happy. And these, not the fundies, are the type of voter the Democrats will need to attract, and will succeed in attracting this Fall.

[ButterflyBlood]

12. Drier's district is a bunch of wealthy suburbs of Los Angeles

I doubt this is too big of an issue there, those type of Republicans tend not to care about social issues. If Drier came out of the closet it wouldn't hurt him much there either.

[Hippo_Tron]

9. I bet Tom DeLay is a closet homosexual...

Now that would be the story of the year.