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

Skip to comments.

Bush Backs Amendment Banning Gay Marriage [Live Thread 10:45 Statement]
Fox News ^ | 02.24.04

Posted on 02/24/2004 7:15:06 AM PST by Dr. Marten

Bush Backs Amendment Banning Gay Marriage

Breaking news...no details yet..


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bush43; culturewar; fma; gaymirage; genderneutralagenda; gwb2004; homosexual; homosexualagenda; marriage; marriageamendment; prisoners; protectfamily; protectmarriage; romans1; samesexmarriage; westerncivilization
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 621-632 next last
To: Mo1
I do that as much as I can. Our founding fathers had a very minor roll in mind for the Judicial Branch of our government. That has gone by the wayside due to these judges that view their position of one of ultimate power. It needs to be pointed out and stopped.
241 posted on 02/24/2004 8:33:44 AM PST by CougarGA7 (Why dont the Democrats just run a ferret. It would make more sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: Imal
I have seen no evidence that the majority of Americans support amending the Constitution for this.

I'm sure that's true. There are, however, myriad issues that people support that are bringing about a federal tyranny.

242 posted on 02/24/2004 8:33:46 AM PST by TigersEye (Regime change in the courts. Impeach activist judges!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative
You've moved into the world of the goofy with that last post.

Formed Homeland Security before 9/11? OMG.

You would have been first in line screaming he was spending too much money on an unnecessary department.

ROFLMAO
243 posted on 02/24/2004 8:34:06 AM PST by Peach (The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
Oh, dear. Did President Bush lose your vote? The one you were never going to grant him anyway?

What a shock.

I guess you missed his speech last night.

Ah, Kerry saying it's not a Federal issue, it's a state issue. He is against gay marriage but supports civil unions.
244 posted on 02/24/2004 8:34:08 AM PST by cyncooper ("Maybe they were hoping he'd lose the next Iraqi election")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
Congress should use the "Exceptions clause" to remove the jurisdiction of the Court from ruling on the constitutionality of bans.

To borrow a boxing analogy, look at it this way: the Amendment is Bush's "Right Hook," and with a more Republican Congress after the election, Congress by way of DeLay et. al., will take up the exceptions clause as the "Left Uppercut," leaving the wayward judiciary humbled if not "TKO'd" for having over played their hand.

With a weakened and chastised Judiciary bloodied and on the floor watch what else may be in the offing. We might then see the reversals of other judicial "extravagancies" and abuses of power, because the Congress will have shown to the public that the judiciary is not all powerful and all mighty, possessing no check or balance.

Homosexuality destroys everything in its path -- socially and physically. That is why the civil laws existed in the first place. The USSC thought it knew better in Lawrence, but Scalia warned this would happen. Guess we couldn't predict it happening so fast and vindicating his position Let the arrogant judiciary be homosexuality's latest victim.

245 posted on 02/24/2004 8:34:16 AM PST by Agamemnon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative
The Founders gave us a way to stop judicial activism.

I assume you are referring to the Exceptions Clause?

246 posted on 02/24/2004 8:34:43 AM PST by TeleStraightShooter (Kerry plans to apply post-Vietnam policy to Iraq: Skedaddle & let the Syrian Ba'athists take over)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: Imal
I agree it is bad to federalize these issues and to enshrine them in the constitution. However, I support the amendment.

The constitutional amendment is necessary because homosexual marriage supporters have changed the definition of marriage in Massachusetts. Until that false court decision, marriage meant a man and woman. The MA supreme court expanded it to include same sex couples. If the damage were confined to MA, I would not want an amendment. But it is likely to spread to other liberal states and eventually will perculate to the Supreme Court.

The amendment restores the original definition to our court system. This change is necessary to preserve the status quo before the bad MA decision.
247 posted on 02/24/2004 8:34:53 AM PST by Forgiven_Sinner (Praying for the Kingdom of God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative
The President is not being 'reactionary.' He is addressing a situation that has JUST become critical.

He is not a member of Congress. He is the President.

And I agree with what you've already been told by someone else......had he come up with this last May, he would have been seen as a bigot, because the American people didn't have the homosexual agenda glaring in neon lights before them as they do now.

NOW is the time that marriage must be legally, and constitutionally protected. NOT last May.

248 posted on 02/24/2004 8:35:00 AM PST by ohioWfan ("ANGER IS NOT AN AGENDA FOR THE FUTURE OF AMERICA")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
I think he should have done this eight months ago...

Watch that kind of rhetoric around here!

249 posted on 02/24/2004 8:35:06 AM PST by GraniteStateConservative (...He had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here...-- Worst.President.Ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
Bill Richardson...

I haven't been watching much TV lately due to the Dim Debates and constant Bush bashing. So today for the first time in a month or so I turn on FOX NEWS and BR is bashing the POTUS for something he says he agrees with in "SUBSTANCE". Blaming GW as though HE was the one breaking the law to call this "CRISIS" to a head. And who the heck is that sycophant BLOND on FOX NEWS? Where did they get that left-winger?

Old Fox News isn't what it use to be!!

250 posted on 02/24/2004 8:35:10 AM PST by PISANO (Our troops...... will NOT tire...will NOT falter.....and WILL NOT FAIL!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
Oh, man... Li'l Andy Sullivan, Boy Blogger, is gonna have a major hissy over this one... :)
251 posted on 02/24/2004 8:35:25 AM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle (I feel more and more like a revolted Charlton Heston, witnessing ape society for the very first time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach
I must get that book. Thanks for tip.
252 posted on 02/24/2004 8:35:59 AM PST by mel (God, help me rid myself of this continuing bitterness and hate for revisioinists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
MSNBC reading a Kerry response that just came over the wires (deserves its own thread when we can get our hands on it)

Attacking patriotism of others (yes, this is in response to this Amendment issue) and trying to divide Americans.

So angry.
253 posted on 02/24/2004 8:36:46 AM PST by cyncooper ("Maybe they were hoping he'd lose the next Iraqi election")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: mel
Aside from terrorism issues, it's the most important book I've read in years. Opened my eyes to the radical gay agenda.
254 posted on 02/24/2004 8:37:16 AM PST by Peach (The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: rdb3
We have heard all that before. It's a non-starter, IMHO.

How is it a non-starter? Is it somehow invalid to refer to the Constitution and its language when discussing the Constitution?

So far, no one has explained why I am "wrong" to oppose amending the Constitution over this issue.

The collection of insults, misdirections and brush-offs I've been getting don't make a very convincing case.

255 posted on 02/24/2004 8:37:16 AM PST by Imal (Misunderstanding of the Constitution is poor grounds for amending it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: Peach
The gays in this country are very lucky to have the rights and legal protections they have now.
256 posted on 02/24/2004 8:37:24 AM PST by Fitzcarraldo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla
can you believe kerry says he doesn't know what's been going on in s.f.
257 posted on 02/24/2004 8:38:28 AM PST by petercooper (America - where your problems aren't your fault, they're someone else's.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
No, abortion is more important--but just barely.
258 posted on 02/24/2004 8:38:29 AM PST by Forgiven_Sinner (Praying for the Kingdom of God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative
He knew that Musgrave was going to introduce this last May. He could have come out at the same time, had her at the WH for the ceremony, and announced that he was in full support of the language of her amendment and that he'd work to get it approved in the House and Senate as quickly as possible. That's all I'm saying.

And I am saying that the timing was wrong - the issue was not yet ripe. And I have a lot more trust and respect for Bush's sense of political timing than I have for yours. Bush doesn't just want to make a political statement - he actually wants to accomplish something.

259 posted on 02/24/2004 8:39:08 AM PST by CA Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: C210N
From your mouth to God's ears. May He grant repentance from heaven. May he deliver us from this abomination!
260 posted on 02/24/2004 8:39:16 AM PST by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 621-632 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