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

To: sinkspur
the bottom line is clear enough, no matter how fractured the president's syntax: he won't support an amendment banning civil unions.

Civil unions are not marriage, by definition. They're civil unions.

So we're agreed - - - Bush won't support an amendment banning civil unions. Dean likes civil unions. Bush has no problems with civil unions. Sinkspur seconds Bush (as Sinkspur always does).

51 posted on 12/18/2003 1:11:27 PM PST by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: churchillbuff
"Civil unions are not marriage, by definition. They're civil unions."

It's all just a disgusting play on words and people are deceiving themselves. Do you really think the homosexuals give a rats tail whether the Churches in America bless their filthy unions or not? All they really want is for the U.S. government to approve their co-habitation, approve their lifestyle, and to support that lifestyle with our tax dollars.

Banning homosexual pervert 'marriages' and compromising with them by blessing their 'civil unions' with new rights and special privileges is nothing more or less than a 100%, complete and total victory for sexual perversion.

56 posted on 12/19/2003 7:18:20 AM PST by TheCrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

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