Bush Backs Amendment Banning Gay Marriage [Live Thread 10:45 Statement]

Fox News ^ | 02.24.04

[Dr. Marten]

Bush Backs Amendment Banning Gay Marriage

Breaking news...no details yet..

[GraniteStateConservative]

I'd add that he did the same with Joe Lieberman's idea for a Homeland Security Dept.

[EEDUDE]

Can you say rope-a-dope?

Suspected this all along.

Looks like the Left misunderestimated him again.

Let the enemy define himself first, then counterpunch.

It's the same thing with Vietnam. DNC brought it up and now doesn't want to talk about it.

If McAwful is getting paid ANYTHING, he's being overpaid.

[Rutles4Ever]

It will solve the "wild west" attitude of Democratic government officials who blatantly break the law in the name of misplaced "compassion".

[KevinDavis]

I should have said the Bush bashers.

[Salvation]

Marriage defined as between a man and a woman.

Activist judges -- and wayward mayors -- take heed!

[Rutles4Ever]

Gotcha. "Extreme" right has become a generic label that the Democrats slap on anyone in favor of saving society.

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping -

Bush steps up to the plate.

I wish they wouldn't call it Gay Marriage. It's not like the Gay Nineties.

Let me know if anyone wants on/off this list.

[Wait4Truth]

This is most certainly not "pure politics"...sounds like something a DUer would say. The President has felt this way ALWAYS.

[cyncooper]

It's been apparent he backs it to those with eyes to see and ears to hear...

Now he'll spell it out for those who didn't "get it".

[Jim Noble]

We shouldn't allow civil unions for gays either - period

We should not confer status based upon the fact of having sexual relations, or not-except for marriage.

Any two persons should be able to contract with each other to perform certain services and to hold power of attorney (I think this is now the case, if not, it should be).

Normal contract law should govern such relations, including a term up to and including ones natural lifespan, and nonseverability with specified damages for nonperformance or termination.

In this regard, personal services contracts entered into between homosexuals would be (legally) stronger than marriage.

The state does not have to "permit" such contracts, it already does.

What homosexual "civil unions" or "marriages" do above and beyond personal service contracts is confer public recognition that a relationship is sexual in nature.

This, the People seem manifestly unwilling to do-even to the point of amending the Constitution to prevent it.

[KJacob]

If Mcawful were a Republican plant what would he do differently?
Just kidding, but his hate message seems to really help republicans.

[cyncooper]

He had not yet made a decision to back the ammendment process but I think the actions of the pro-gay mayor in SF might have just broke the straw on the camels back.

Yes, he had. He said in his SOTU Address that if activist judges continued (and that speech was before Mass and CA and NM acted) that the amendment would be the only recourse.

Logic dictates that by pointing that out, he backed that course.

[Howlin]

Breaking News Bump!

[Wait4Truth]

If I remember correctly, he said he was against gay marriage way back in the 2000 campaign. This is not "pure politics" as one poster said. Some people are never happy no matter what the President says or does. Nothing is ever enough.

[cyncooper]

civil unions may have to be left to the states to decide

You are correct.

[King Black Robe]

Thank God!!!!!

[Sloth]

We don't need to amend the Constitution. We need to be impeaching judges.

[rintense]

True. True.

[cyncooper]

It will happen.

Mark my words.

[GraniteStateConservative]

He's a leader by coming out in favor of an amendment he didn't author and that was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary nearly one year ago on May 21st, 2003? Sounds like a follower. Musgrave is the leader.