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.

[concerned about politics]

You won't find much on Kerry. He only showed up for work 23% last year.
He pops in every once in a while to see how Ted Kennedy voted and just does the same. I don't think he's at work long enough to actually read a bill. Then he takes a few more days off.
The man is undependable as a Senator. Imagine a President who only shows up for work to get the photo ops, and then goes back on vacation while Americans are being wiped out by Al Quata.
"Let them eat cake! I'm on break!"

[Dog Gone]

That is a really weird provision. A proposed amendment passes the legislature to get onto the ballot with only a 25% vote, but must do so two years in a row.

I'd like to talk to the person who authored that provision, but I'd guess he died of a crack overdose about 200 years ago.

[TigersEye]

" ... If activist judges insist on re-defining marriage by court order, the only alternative will be the constitutional process. ..."

What about impeachment and removal from office? A Constitutional Amendment to stop activist judges is like a gun-control law to stop murder. Drive-by court rulings aren't committed by law abiding judges.

[jwalsh07]

Activist judges do suck! I keep thinking Kerry probably wants to name one of these MA Clymers to the SCOTUS.

You Ma'am have put your finger right on one of two main issues in this campaign. The ideologues blinded by their ideolgy will vote against Bush in an effort to teach him a lesson and we will end up with the likes of Margaret H Marshall polluting our federal courts.

[jwalsh07]

LOL, I knew you'd get a kick out of that one. It's a twist on protecting the rights of the minority.

[PhiKapMom]

I cannot stand Kerry -- was there when he ran for office although my voting residence was still CA at the time. His commercials made me want to throw something at the TV back then and it has gotten worse now. BTW, I tried to register to vote but was told to come back as they didn't have Republican voter registration cards -- never heard of such nonsense.

Spent nine, long, miserable months living in MA back in the mid 80's when my husband was on an Industry assignment with the AF at RCA in Burlington. He was supposed to be stationed at Hanscom AFB, MA, following the assignment. I told him if he stayed in MA (which he liked), I was going to take the three kids and go back to Ohio to my parents. They were not going to spend another year in an inferior school system.

Biggest bunch of liberals I have ever met in my life. Didn't meet one conservative until the movers from Plymouth, MA, showed up to move the Family out of the State. I vowed to never set foot in the state again. They packed up the truck and we drove in two vehicles to the NY State Line before I would agree to spend the night.

I have never hated a state as much as I hated living in MA. Detested Dukakis with a passion along with his wife and spent 1988 telling everyone I knew why they should not vote for Dukakis. I had one teacher tell me about how superior the MA education system was and I launched. My daughter in 3rd grade had a math book that was 27 years old that they used. A science book that was 19 years old and a history book that didn't even have Nixon's resignation in it and this was the mid 80's.

[Contra]

This is great timing to sink Kerry, not that it's really needed. In fact Kerry will no doubt come out against the ruling but it's too late, the damage is done, he will be painted as a far left liberal from the new "gay" Las Vegas. This kind of thing could really do in liberals for a long time.

[GailA]

liberal judges are the NUMBER ONE reason to reelect GW. Can you imagine 2-3 SCOTUS appointees just like these jokers??????????

[jwalsh07]

Massachusetts Won't Get Vote on Marriage Amendment
— July 26, 2002

In a constitutional violation which can't be remedied, Massachusetts legislators voted last Wednesday 137-53 to adjourn the constitutional convention without ever debating or voting on the Protection of Marriage Amendment. The adjournment effectively ends the amendment initiative without the Legislature taking "final action" on it, which the Massachusetts Constitution requires. To get on the 2004 ballot, the amendment initiative needed only 50 votes this during this session's constitutional convention and next year's. Thwarting Massachusetts' constitutional process which requires the legislature to take "final action" on amendment initiatives before they adjourn the session, Senate President Birmingham would not call for a vote on the amendment. The adjournment disappointed many as the amendment protecting marriage as a male-female union was supported by 130,000 voter signatures who hoped it would go on the 2004 ballot.

[jwalsh07]

The 25% deal is why Birmingham violated the Mass Constitution and refused to allow a vote on DOMA two years ago. He was afraid of the amendment process. Judicial tyranny, legislator tyranny, tyranny of the minority.... Mass has it all.

[PhiKapMom]

Are you as tired of hearing that Pres Bush and all of us need to be taught a lesson by allowing a RAT to win? What was 8 years of Clinton? I didn't need that lesson either!

Am not even sure the people that have the audacity to say that are conservative and they definitely are not Republicans. We were in the minority for too many years to want any RATs in office.

[rintense]

Here's my question. Let's say gay couple A gets legally married in Massachusetts. Then, they move to a new state which does not recognize gay marriage, and, in fact, has an amendment defining marriage as that of a man and a woman. What happens then? Is the new state obliged to recognize the marriage from another state? Or does gay couple A have grounds to take it to the SCOTUS?

[bobo1]

Although I applaud the president's statement, I find the constitutional amendment approach a position of weakness.

The U.S. Constitution has not ever guaranteed or sanctioned homosexual union. No state constitiution was ever written to sanction this perversity either. It was never considered by our founding fathers and they would have deemed it to be an abomination. This ruling contradicts all history and thousands of precedents set concerning sodomy.

We do not need an amendment. By all logic, sanctioning of this type of perversity should and could only come about by a constitutional amendment allowing "gay" unions.

The obvious solution is the removal of judges that overstep their constitutional authority by attempting to write legislation which is outside their power and position.

There is no such animal as a gay "marriage". Marriage is the union between a man and a woman by definition. The definition that liberals wish to place on "marriage" is a lie. The ruling is a lie, and makes the judges liars. The constitution does not need to be changed, it needs to be upheld.

The Democrat party is the party of perverts, pedophiles and pornographers. They are the ones that need to attempt to pass an amendment. The fact is, the people would not allow it, so they must get their way through treachary and deceit.

I am tired of seeing the liberal agenda being brought into fruition through the cesspool composed of slimeball liberal judges. They have violated the constitution by their actions.

Removal is the only legitimate option. A position of strength is where we should be. The constitution is on our side.

Blessings, Bobo

[PhiKapMom]

I cannot imagine judges like this! Anyone on here that advocates boycotting this election to teach Pres Bush a lesson, better get that through their heads that these are the type of judges that Kerry will appoint for LIFETIME appointments.

That is such a scarey thought and could change this Nation forever.

[Antoninus]

Marriage Amendment NOW!

Let's Roll...

[PhiKapMom]

I have no idea but I bet we find out in a hurry as they test all of our states after being married in MA. This is flat out disgusting to see this liberal activism by judges.

[jwalsh07]

I told him if he stayed in MA (which he liked), I was going to take the three kids and go back to Ohio to my parents

LOL.

You should feel my pain then, I live in Ct.

[arasina]

Kerry probably wants to name one of these MA Clymers to the SCOTUS.

With the swift approval of Teddy Kennedy.

[puroresu]

#####In a constitutional violation which can't be remedied, Massachusetts legislators voted last Wednesday 137-53 to adjourn the constitutional convention without ever debating or voting on the Protection of Marriage Amendment. The adjournment effectively ends the amendment initiative without the Legislature taking "final action" on it, which the Massachusetts Constitution requires. To get on the 2004 ballot, the amendment initiative needed only 50 votes this during this session's constitutional convention and next year's. Thwarting Massachusetts' constitutional process which requires the legislature to take "final action" on amendment initiatives before they adjourn the session, Senate President Birmingham would not call for a vote on the amendment. The adjournment disappointed many as the amendment protecting marriage as a male-female union was supported by 130,000 voter signatures who hoped it would go on the 2004 ballot.#####


In other words, the various branches of state government there appear to be conspiring against the people. The legislative leadership blocked a proposal they were legally required to vote on, so as to enable the Supreme Court to issue an unconstitutional edict during a time period in which the voters would be powerless to respond.

[PhiKapMom]

I am tired of seeing the liberal agenda being brought into fruition through the cesspool composed of slimeball liberal judges. They have violated the constitution by their actions.

I agree with you. Cannot imagine living in a state that the State Supreme Court did this.