STATEMENT BY PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH ON THE MA SUPREME COURT RULING APPROVING GAY MARRIAGE

The White House ^ | February 4, 2004 | President George W. Bush

[PhiKapMom]

February 4, 2004

STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT

Today's ruling of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court is deeply troubling. Marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman. If activist judges insist on re-defining marriage by court order, the only alternative will be the constitutional process. We must do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage.

[Aquinasfan]

Go George go!

[Ol' Sox]

Our country in going to hell in a hand basket, every decent value we have is being attacked by liberals in every walk of life.

Stand and fight, my FRiend.

Ephesians 6:
10Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes. 12For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.

Proverbs 12:
5 The plans of the righteous are just, but the advice of the wicked is deceitful. 6 The words of the wicked lie in wait for blood, but the speech of the upright rescues them. 7 Wicked men are overthrown and are no more, but the house of the righteous stands firm. 8 A man is praised according to his wisdom, but men with warped minds are despised.

[Marysecretary]

You can never please these Bush Bashers, cync. They've become blind, deaf and, IMHO, dumb!

[BureaucratusMaximus]

The only thing that will REALLY slow this 3% of the population in their quest to normalize perversion, is to stop being politically correct and call it what it is, a deadly and unnatural abomination. Then maybe, just maybe, we have a shot at waking up the masses regarding this one facet of indoctrination.

I hope and pray that it will work out as stated above. Enough is enough.

[Kryptonite]

Thanks for accepting my apology. I appreciate your sentiments.

[cyncooper]

Let's see....this decision came down yesterday. Rather than waiting to see what they would do and then release just this press statement, President Bush took the bull by the horns and was first up to the plate in his SOTU Address when he spoke of this issue.

Then, as soon as the expected travesty was wrought, he issues yet another statement that is plain in its meaning.

What is it you expect him to have done at this point?

[xzins]

Hallelujah for our President!

Please distribute, as PhiKapMom has asked, to all your lists.

[NCC-1701]

"...Wow - I am amazed it is so direct. No weasel words..."

And that is a breath of fresh air in today's PC climate. Direct and to the point. Way to go President Bush. YOU SAID IT!!!!!

[zippoman]

No weasel words? You must be kidding. The whole thing is weasel words.

[ArGee]

Please distribute this far and wide to let everyone know that President Bush stands for the sacred institution of marriage between a man and a woman.

I'm pleased with the comment as far as it goes, but it doesn't go much farther than "I'm deeply saddened."

I heard a report today that the President will continue to talk about the sanctity of marriage, but will not take any more direct action due to the upcoming election. I'm not sure I believe that, but I would really like to see the direct action. A call for impeachment of judges who attempt to do the legislature's job would be very valuable, IMHO.

Shalom.

[ArGee]

The constitution should not become a dictionary.

Agreed. The correct action to take is some well aimed impeachments of activists judges.

It's already supported by the Constitution. A legislature with cojones could do a lot to undo the damage the judiciary is doing.

Shalom.

[Romulus]

President Bush stands for the sacred institution of marriage between a man and a woman.

And for looking the other way as the unique significance of marriage is emptied out.

President Bush supports civil unions for same sex couples:

“If necessary, I will support a constitutional amendment which would honor marriage between a man and a woman, codify that, and will – the position of this administration is that whatever legal arrangements people want to make, they’re allowed to make, so long as it’s embraced by the state or … start at the state level.”

[Petronski]

Your point is well made, and his duplicity makes me very angry.

[MeekOneGOP]

Thanks for the ping, PKM ! ...

Dubya:

Today's ruling of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court is deeply troubling. Marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman. If activist judges insist on re-defining marriage by court order, the only alternative will be the constitutional process. We must do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage.

[breakem]

By the way what is the govt. doing giving out a license to get married if it needs to stay out of it..........

Normy, now you're getting the point.

Of course I think marriage is a building block of our society. What gave you the idea I didn't. In fact, I'm married myself and it turns out to be a great idea. So let's let those queers in on it and maybe some of them will settle down, be more monogomous and healthy. Good deal all the way around, hey?

[Dalan]

I'm one pissed-off and humiliated Massachusetts resident. Here's the letter I just wrote to my state "representative":

Dear Representative Eldridge,

I am writing to you as a concerned life-long Massachusetts citizen and a voting constituent of yours.

We have spoken in the past on this subject, immediately following the original SJC decision in November, and I understand your position to be in favor of both the November ruling and by extension, this recent ruling mandating full gay marriage. I also understand that you would be opposed (per a published Boston Globe survey) to a Constitutional amendment clarifying the meaning of marriage as being between one man and one woman. (Please do correct me if I am mischaracterizing your position on these issues).

That having been said, I must express my deep dissatisfaction and disappointment with both the court's decision and our legislature's reaction to it, yourself included. What the SJC did is an insult and an affront to all Massachusetts citizens and our elected representatives. You, as an elected representative, ought to be outraged at this usurpation of legislative power by unelected, unaccountable judges, whether or not you agree with the concept of gay marriage. I am utterly outraged and offended by this activist court - for the first time in my life, I am literally ashamed and embarrassed to be a Massachusetts citizen.

If you fail to use your position as an elected representative and do not stop and reverse this sort of blatant judicial activism, then you are not doing your job.

Now, regarding the substance of the issue itself, I am completely opposed to the counterfeit and fraudulent notion of homosexual "marriage". There is no such thing, there can be no such thing, and judicial fiat cannot transform fiction into fact. Yes, the institution of marriage in this country is on shaky ground, but the answer cannot be to destroy it completely. And introducing the concept of homosexual marriage most certain DOES destroy it, because it renders the institution meaningless. If a word can have any meaning that any individual wants to ascribe to it based on matters of personal choice, than the word has no real meaning. We ought to be pursuing ways to reinforce marriage and reaffirm the importance of the traditional family as this is where the best interests of our children, and thus our future, lies.

After this ruling, how much longer will it be before the gay agenda begins forcing its way in to our public schools? I know it will happen; you know it will happen. I will not accept it - will you?

I have also come to the conclusion that the gay agenda is NOT about gaining legal protections and civil rights. Clearly, that isn't good enough. The gay community obviously wants to force acceptance of their lifestyle onto the rest of the population by commanding us to accept their relationships as equivalent to the union of a man and a woman - the cornerstone of civilized human culture. I reject this forced acceptance, and a judicial diktat will not change my mind. Not today, not tomorrow, not ever.

In fact, this militant imposition of the gay agenda is polarizing me in the opposite direction. Prior to all this, I had no issue with gays. I am not a religious person and do not attend any church, so I am not basing my position on any religious prejudices. I used to be generally in favor of civil union legislation, but now that I've seen the depth and breadth of the true gay agenda, I will no longer even support civil unions. Enough is enough; this has gone too far. Simply put, I am indignant and have been driven to action.

If I have misunderstood your position on these SJC rulings and the issue of gay "marriage", please correct me. Otherwise, know that I will use every extent of my personal and social life to communicate with friends, family, and neighbors on this issue to see that next time, we elect someone who truly represents our values and interests.

[Petronski]

Do not go gently into that good night.
Rage! Rage against the dying of the light!


Very well done.

[breakem]

Lets see what an honorable poster you are. I said my wife and I were laughing at your comment. You then took shots at out marriage even though you know nothing about us. Your "justification" I opened a window into my marriage. Well if you think that was a window you're just a negative poster looking for cover. As a matter of fact, we may shoot someone who forces there way into a closed window in our home. No one invited you in and you are trying to justify your dishonorable behavior.

[breakem]

out=our LOL!

[blackie]

GWB Is The Man!

~~ Bush/Cheney 2004 ~~