Posted on 10/28/2004 5:16:47 PM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
HR 3396 9/10/96
Vote to pass a bill to prohibit marriage between members of the same sex in federal law, and to provide that no state is required to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.
John Kerry Voted NO.
(Excerpt) Read more at vote-smart.org ...
So he took part in it before not taking part, right? Or was it with his voting?
It's not an issue with Kerry. He's in a "no sex" marriage after all.
This is yet another thing that Bush did not bust Kerry strong enough on during the debates.
Kerry says he supports states rights, yet he voted against states rights along with just a handful of Senators, and against even the majority of Dem Senators. This underscores how far out of the mainstream he is.
Kerry says he voted against it because it was 'mean-spirited' and 'unconstitutional,' which basically means that he considered the position he claims to hold now back then as being mean-spirited and unconstituional. In other words,he tipped his hand; he revealed back then that he fully expects the judiciary to at a miniumum rule that states must accept gay marriage from another state.
Some ads should really be run on this topic.
John Kerry may say that he believes that marriage should only be between a man and a woman, but his vote on HR 3396, shows that he won't defend states that have banned gay marriage(or will ban gay marriage this year),from having to recoginize gay marriages performed in other states.
http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?vote_id=1105&can_id=S0421103
When John Kerry says that he thinks that the issue of gay marriage should be left up to the states, his vote on HR 3396 shows that to only be a smoke-screen.
John Kerry, as well, does not support a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as being only between one man and one woman.
If you live in a state that has already banned gay marriage, or live in a state that most likely will ban gay marriage this year at the polls(there are about 10 states that will vote on this this election cycle) DO NOT vote for Kerry if you want someone in the White House that will defend traditional marriage.
If you want to defend traditional marriage, vote for Bush.
It's as simple as that.
Please call your local radio stations that have hosts who allow callers to express their views. Inform America about how Kerry has voted concerning defending traditional marriage in the states that have banned/will ban gay marriage.
Please post all over the internet Kerry's vote on NOT defending states that have banned gay marriage.
Thanks.
There were only 13 Senators that voted along with kerry.
Even Bill Clinton had the sense to sign this into law.
That shows you how far to the left that sKerry is.
Yes, I believe as well that ads should have/should be ran on this.
Why is everyone underestimating Bush and Rove ? So far they are batting 1000 in elections.
First post here, you guys...Please be nice to me!
President Bush said: "States ought to be able to have the right to pass laws that enable people to be able to have rights like others..." "I don't think we should deny people rights to a civil union, a legal arrangement, if that's what a state chooses to do so," Bush said in an interview aired Tuesday on ABC. Bush acknowledged that his position put him at odds with the Republican platform, which opposes civil unions.
http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/10/27/153730.shtml
"...if that's what a state chooses to do so..."
This is the part of his statement that they'll all gloss over. I mean, if we end up having this forced down our throats, then at least the individual states can fight against this on their own turf, bringing the actual decision closer to the people, and I'm sure it'll be an uphill battle from there. When you take it to the people, the people start to pay attention.
Yep. That Bush. What a dummy. *Wink*
A civil union for gays is a far cry different than gay marriage.
Gays haven't been fighting for civil unions. they don't want civil unions. They want gay marriage. Period!
Gays and their enablers fought for gay marriage in Mass. and elsewhere this year. like I said, gays don't want civil unions.
So Bush favoring civil unions is no big deal. Bush, though does not support gay marriage. Bush has fought for a Constitutional Amendment banning agy marriage. kerry is opposed to it. Kerry voted against DOMA.
Kerry wont defend traditional marriage in states that have banned it.
The part that you leave out is that Kerry's route in voting against DOMA , and not supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage is that he favors a route in which APPELATE COURTS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND EVEN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE US CAN OVERTURN STATE LAWS WHICH HAVE BANNED GAY MARRIAGE in the states that have banned gay marriage.
To protect traditional marriage DO NOT vote for sKerry.
No doubt you know this already. Please don't plug for Kerry. Kerry wont defend traditional marriage.
Bush will. and has.
A civil union for gays is a far cry different than gay marriage.
Gays haven't been fighting for civil unions. they don't want civil unions. They want gay marriage. Period!
Gays and their enablers fought for gay marriage in Mass. and elsewhere this year. like I said, gays don't want civil unions.
So Bush favoring civil unions is no big deal. Bush, though does not support gay marriage. Bush has fought for a Constitutional Amendment banning agy marriage. kerry is opposed to it. Kerry voted against DOMA.
Kerry wont defend traditional marriage in states that have banned it.
The part that you leave out is that Kerry's route in voting against DOMA , and not supporting a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage is that he favors a route in which APPELATE COURTS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND EVEN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE US CAN OVERTURN STATE LAWS WHICH HAVE BANNED GAY MARRIAGE in the states that have banned gay marriage.
To protect traditional marriage DO NOT vote for sKerry.
No doubt you know this already. Please don't plug for Kerry. Kerry wont defend traditional marriage.
Bush will. and has.
No not really, this is very important, because the Judges are breaking constitutional law in overriding the peoples right to vote. Bush is right, they need to be held accountable!
When you live in a liberal area and see all the crap riding in on the coat tails of this issue, or when you see its effect in schools, colleges, churches, you have to realize, it is important. Maybe as important as terrorism.
Let me get this straight (no pun intended). First, militant gay groups shop for a liberal 'Rat judge, and get her to impose a gay "right" to marry on an unwilling public. Then, when they encounter opposition, these same militant gays and their allies accuse conservatives of conjuring up gay marriage as an issue just to inflame the public and win votes for Bush. Now, wouldn't gay marriage have never been an issue if it hadn't been created out of thin air in the first place? Or am I missing something?
Political correctness is SO confusing!
Please! Don't anyone think I support sKerry in any way, shape or form. I'd abort my First Born if anyone thought that; and he's just turned 17, LOL! It's legal, you know! (Sadly.)
Gidget said: "When you live in a liberal area and see all the crap riding in on the coat tails of this issue, or when you see its effect in schools, colleges, churches, you have to realize, it is important. Maybe as important as terrorism."
I totally agree! It's ALL important, and sadly so few people pay attention. I live south of Madison, WI. We had to put up with sKerry and "The Boss" today. At taxpayer expense, and our local County Clerk just flung open the door to Absentee Ballots for sKerry today. In fact, they kept the polls open until 25 minutes ago just to be sure they captured every fraudulent vote. Some days I really hate my city. This is one of them, no doubt!
I've already voted. Straight Republican Ticket in my county. Don't blame me.
Hey, thanks for spamming all the state topics.</sarcasm>
Bologna! Ever hear of the 14th amendment? If liberal Supremes get appointed it’s going to be ruled unconstitutional.
- the constitution already offers pretty decent protection for the states against same sex marriage.
You mean the 10th amendment? Ask ANY lawyer if it has any power anymore.
And if for some reason the Court finds that the constitution doesn't protect states from gay marriage, then a federal law won't save the states, because federal laws can't supersede the constitution.
So now you are doing a Kerry? Is your name flipper?
blah, blah, blah… - aren't there better things we could be spending our energy on???
Love this little tiddy…Yes conservatives can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can actually lobby against certain social issues and be pro-culture/pro-defense/pro-fiscal responsibility at the same time.
I smell Liberaltarian...I smell ozone.
Care for some marmalade on your Kerry, er, I mean, your toast?
Homosexual Magazine Reprints Kerry Article Against DOMA
(Kerry voted No on Defense of Marriage act)
Traditional Values Coalition ^ | August 13, 2004 | Traditional Values Coalition
Posted on 09/07/2004 7:06:36 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1209173/posts
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.