Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush 'Troubled' by Gay Marriage Issue (RE: San Fran weddings)
Yahoo News ^

Posted on 02/18/2004 9:28:40 AM PST by KantianBurke

WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Wednesday he was "troubled" by gay weddings in San Francisco and by legal decisions in Massachusetts that could clear the way for same-sex marriage. But he declined to say whether he is any closer to backing a constitutional ban on such vows.

"I have watched carefully what's happening in San Francisco, where licenses were being issued, even though the law states otherwise," Bush said. "I have consistently stated that I'll support law to protect marriage between a man and a woman. Obviously these events are influencing my decision."

"I am watching very carefully, but I am troubled by what I've seen," Bush said.

He didn't answer directly when asked whether he is any closer to endorsing a constitutional ban on same-sex marriages, as conservative groups say the White House has assured them Bush will do.

"I strongly believe marriage should be defined as between a man and a woman," Bush said during an Oval Office session with Tunisian President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. "I am troubled by activist judges who are defining marriage."

"People need to be involved in this decision," Bush said. "Marriage ought to be defined by the people not by the courts. And I'm watching it carefully."

Gay and lesbian couples from Europe and more than 20 states have lined up outside the ornate San Francisco City Hall since city officials decided to begin marrying same-sex couples six days ago. City officials said 172 couples were married Tuesday, a pace that would bring the total number who have taken vows promising to be "spouses for life" to over 3,000 by Friday.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently ruled that it is unconstitutional to bar gay couples from marriage. Under the decision, the nation's first legally sanctioned gay marriages are scheduled to begin in mid-May.

Lawmakers are proposing a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as a union between one man and one woman, and the Legislature resumes its deliberations of amendments on March 11.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Arkansas; US: California; US: Florida; US: Kentucky; US: Massachusetts; US: New York; US: Ohio; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: 1stamendment; 2016election; abovetheruleoflaw; anarchy; anarchyinamerica; anarchyincalifornia; blackrobedtyrants; bush; buttwranglers; california; clinton; counterculture; culturejihad; cultureofdeath; culturewar; debauchery; destructionoffamily; election2016; felony; firstamendment; florida; fornicating; fudgepacking; gayintoleristas; gaykkk; gaymarriage; gomorrah; goodvsevil; gwb2004; hedonism; hedonist; homosexualagenda; insane; jebbush; judicialactivism; kentucky; kimdavis; lawlessness; lawuntothemselves; leftistagenda; leftsagenda; leviticus1822; libertarians; marriage; massachusetts; medicalmarijuana; oligarchy; outofcontrol; phoneymarriage; poopsex; prisoners; prop8; proposition8; protectfamily; protectmarriage; rebelliousanarchy; relativism; relativist; revolution; romans1; ruleoflaw; sanfrancisco; sf; sodom; sodomy; spiritualbattle; stunt; takecultureback; tyrants; tyrantsagenda; violatemarriagelaw; wagesofsin; westerncivilization; wickedness; worldviewscollide
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-139 next last
Checked and didn't see this posted. Bush's take on the ongoing "marriages" in San Fran. "Troubled?" More like "sticking finger in the wind as there's an election coming up and don't want to be portrayed as a mean old Republican."
1 posted on 02/18/2004 9:28:40 AM PST by KantianBurke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator
Could you add in the remark "RE: San Fran weddings" to the title? Will make clear as to why this is in the breaking news column. Thanks!
2 posted on 02/18/2004 9:33:08 AM PST by KantianBurke (Principles, not blind loyalty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke
This gay marriage thing is an easy issue. I think I have seen 70% among Americans in support of a constitutional ammendment defining marriage.

Notice the media calls it "Banning gay marriage". Its also banning man/beast marriage, man/child marriage and man/object marriage... The ammendment wont say anything about "No man may marry a man or woman marry a woman." It will say "Man/woman allowed...all others need not apply"

3 posted on 02/18/2004 9:34:14 AM PST by smith288 (http://www.ejsmithweb.com/FR/JohnKerry/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke
Its a much bigger problem for democrats. They either have to support gay marriage against the wishes of the majority or support it with the minority.
4 posted on 02/18/2004 9:34:48 AM PST by cripplecreek (you win wars by making the other dumb SOB die for his country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke
I think I have seen 70% among Americans in support of a constitutional ammendment defining marriage.

Actually, I meant to say 70% against gay marriage in principle... 60% for ammendment...my bad.

5 posted on 02/18/2004 9:35:39 AM PST by smith288 (http://www.ejsmithweb.com/FR/JohnKerry/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke
Judges make law, executives interpret law. Its the new American paradigm.
6 posted on 02/18/2004 9:36:15 AM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke; little jeremiah; EdReform; scripter
"Troubled" in the title is a fair word. I just heard the President's voice. His tone struck me as seriously concerned, reflective, ready to act. Almost ominous.
7 posted on 02/18/2004 9:38:49 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of it!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke
I don't think that's his take on it at all. He's simply letting it "float". Let SF embarrass themselves, then the state of California. Americans want a constitutional ammendment and he knows it. No need to rush to judgment on this one.
8 posted on 02/18/2004 9:39:08 AM PST by sarasota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
No, judges make law, executives implement what they think the judges meant. Legislators just sit around, look pretty, "investigate" something, and collect a paycheck.
9 posted on 02/18/2004 9:40:39 AM PST by bobjam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke
Talk is cheap!!

Bush is doing a good job of talking about the issues without taking any actions, he doesn't want to upset the Log Cabin Republicans who voted for him in 2000.

Here are some quotes from Log Cabin executive director Patrick Guerriero in response to the President's State of the Union address:

George W. Bush was elected in 2000 by bringing Americans together. State of the Union addresses should be used to unite all Americans around the nation's highest priorities. Americans are threatened by terrorism and job uncertainty - not gay and lesbian families,"

"Log Cabin Republicans have stood with this President in the war on terror. Log Cabin supports the President on cutting taxes for American families and expanding efforts to combat HIV/AIDS at home and abroad."

"The mission of Log Cabin is greater than one President or one issue. Last night's speech shows us how much work remains in our effort to build a more inclusive GOP. To be the majority party, the GOP must be built on a foundation of freedom, fairness and equality---for all Americans,"

Log Cabin Republicans is the nation's largest gay Republican organization, with state and local chapters nationwide, a full-time Washington office and a federal political action committee.

Log Cabin Republicans - http://www.lcr.org/
10 posted on 02/18/2004 9:41:52 AM PST by jgrubbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobjam
Not in San Francisco, The executive there, MAyor Whateverhisnameis, interpreted the constitution to mean that he could break the laws of California and issue marriage licenses to homosexual couples.

Any word on how he interprets the Ca Constitution vis a vis polygamy and polyamory?

11 posted on 02/18/2004 9:43:19 AM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke
I think you're jumping to judgment on this. Do you really think President Bush is only concerned about getting reelected? I don't believe that and I hope you don't either.
12 posted on 02/18/2004 9:44:11 AM PST by rj45mis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bobjam
People break the law, and flaunt the law breaking, and some look, oh, just so troubled! Bush loses my vote, right here.
If he can do no better than this, he is just impotent. Where have the real men gone?
13 posted on 02/18/2004 9:44:24 AM PST by tessalu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

To: KantianBurke
Bush troubled? Where did he get that phrase ... Senator Orrin (no balls) Hatch?
15 posted on 02/18/2004 9:48:00 AM PST by BluH2o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tessalu
"Bush loses my vote, right here."

and just who will you vote for...Archey Bunker?
16 posted on 02/18/2004 9:49:02 AM PST by rj45mis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: tessalu
People break the law, and flaunt the law breaking, and some look, oh, just so troubled! Bush loses my vote, right here. If he can do no better than this, he is just impotent. Where have the real men gone?

This is a state issue. What do you want him to do? Bomb San Francisco.

But you keep on posting, just shows how impotent your brain is.

17 posted on 02/18/2004 9:49:07 AM PST by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: smith288
Yep, you are right, what is next on horizon. well all that comes to my mind is pedophila. After all there are already some groups organized to support that.
18 posted on 02/18/2004 9:49:26 AM PST by mel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke
George W. Bush on Sodomy

In an interview with Diane Sawyer on gay unions, President Bush said, “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 at the state level.” In other words, if state Supreme Court judges want “civil unions” like the Vermont statute, that state should be allowed to have it. We should not be surprised by the judicial tyranny that threatens to force gay marriages, “gay civil unions,” and a new state religion, atheistic humanism, upon us – we have supported and voted for men such as President Bush who appointed these pro-abortion, pro-homosexual judicial activists. The same family advocacy groups that condemn statements of President Bush like this that undermine traditional marriage supported him in 2000 and will probably support him in 2004.

President Bush has stated that he has no qualms about hiring homosexuals, and he has proven it. He has appointed open homosexuals to high government positions at a rate that makes Bill Clinton look like a homophobe! In December of 1999, when President Bush was Governor of Texas, he appointed a supporter of the Houston Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus and also of Planned Parenthood, Martha Hill Jamison, to the 164th District Court in Houston. Very early in his tenure as President, G.W. Bush appointed a pro-homosexual, pro-abortion candidate to the Federal bench. Early in 2000, President Bush attempted to purge the Republican platform of planks against homosexual marriage and homosexuals in the military. On April 9, 2001, he appointed a renown homosexual activist, Scott Evertz, to the Office of National AIDS Policy, which was the first appointment of an open homosexual to this federal position. On June 18, 2002, he transferred Evertz to direct U.S. Policy on Global Fund for AIDS and appointed another homosexual activist to take over as new director of the Office of National AIDS Policy.

On September 18, 2001, President Bush appointed a homosexual activist to be Ambassador to Romania at the protest of the Romanian government. Furthermore, President Bush authorized a Clinton policy that allows an “unmarried partner” of a foreign aid worker to be given the same status as a married spouse. So the ambassador’s homosexual lover accompanies him to official government functions, travels with and resides with him on the taxpayers’ tab. On August 22, 2001, President Bush appointed an open homosexual to the U.S. Commission on Fine Arts.25 He presided over the appointment of another open homosexual to oversee the choice of civilian personnel at the Pentagon. The Bush administration posted a job for a "gay and lesbian program specialist" at the Department of Agriculture. On November 1, 2001, President Bush appointed an open homosexual to the State Department as an arms control advisor, which was the first appointment of an openly gay person to a senior arms control post. President Bush insisted that openly homosexual Congressman Jim Kolbe of Arizona be given a prominent speaking role at the Republican National Convention. On January 25, 2002, President Bush appointed many openly gay Republicans to the President’s Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS.

G.W. Bush hired running mate Dick Cheney’s openly gay daughter to be a consultant for him during his campaign. “The governor believes Mr. Cheney has a wonderful family,” a Bush spokesman said. “Being gay or lesbian is not a liability in this campaign. The governor embraces both of Mr. Cheney’s daughters and will invite them to campaign with him.” Dick Cheney openly promotes “same-sex unions.”

On Dec. 21, 2001, President Bush and the Republican Congress passed historic legislation extending family health benefits to Washington, D.C., employee's "partners" and also gave unfettered adoption rights to D.C. homosexual couples. He refused to nullify a 1998 Clinton executive order prohibiting discrimination against homosexuals in the federal workforce. He signed a bill allowing death benefits to be paid to the “domestic partners” of firefighters and police officers who die in the line of duty. This was the first time that a federal death benefit was granted to same-sex couples. He has increased funding for homosexual propaganda campaigns under the guise of health education programs. He allowed the Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Justice, to openly celebrate “gay pride.” On April 18, 2002, at the annual meeting of the Log Cabin Republicans, the White House hosted a first-ever policy briefing for gay Republicans, featuring senior administration advisors. On June 24, 2002, President Bush signed the Father Mychal Judge Act, in honor of the openly gay fire department chaplain who died at the World Trade Center on 9-11. This act allows public safety officers killed in the line of duty to assign federal benefits to designated beneficiaries, including same-sex partners. It is the first such federal law which allows such benefits to be granted.

President Bush publicly praised the Metropolian Community Church of Los Angeles on occasion of its 35th anniversary, a church that performs 6,000 “gay marriages” annually. In his letter of congratulations, President Bush said, “By encouraging the celebration of faith and sharing of God's love and boundless mercy, churches like yours put hope in people's hearts and a sense of purpose in their lives. This milestone provides an opportunity to reflect on your years of service and to rejoice in God's faithfulness to your congregation."

George Bush joined a horde of homosexual activists in maligning and mischaracterizing a Christian man, Jerry Thacker, he had appointed to the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS. Mr. Thacker’s wife acquired the disease from a blood transfusion during delivery, and when she and her infant son succumbed to the disease, Jerry Thacker, now HIV positive, devoted himself to ministering the transforming love of God to those dying of AIDS. He offered forgiveness and redemption to homosexuals through the grace of Jesus Christ and reparative counseling. Presidential spokesman Ari Fleischer said of Thacker, "The views that he holds are far, far removed from what the president believes." Thacker withdrew from the appointment after President Bush and the homosexual smear machine began to denigrate and verbally assault him for his beliefs.

George Bush’s home church in Texas is Highland Park United Methodist Church in Dallas. This church welcomes impenitent homosexuals as members. President Bush said he reads the Bible daily, but he confessed to the New York Times, “I don’t necessarily believe every single word is literally true.” About the evolution-creation debate, he said, “The verdict is still out on how God created the earth. I don’t use the Bible as necessarily a way to predict the findings of science.” In other words, Darwinism may be true according to President Bush. When the Bible and a scientific consensus are at odds, whom do you think that George Bush believes?
19 posted on 02/18/2004 9:50:05 AM PST by jgrubbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jgrubbs
No source, no link, in your reply #18. But what the hey Jgrubbs you like the homosexual activists have your own agenda to push.
20 posted on 02/18/2004 9:54:51 AM PST by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-139 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson