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 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 621-632 next last
To: Salvation
Why should we have to amend our Constitution to do this?
Those in favor of gay "marriage" should have to get the amendment - the onus is on them.
All that has to be done is remove this from the "incorporation" doctrine. Let the states vote their laws, allowing or disallowing, and don't make other states honor the "union" legally.
61
posted on
02/24/2004 7:40:12 AM PST
by
MrB
To: KJacob
Welcome to FR. There couldn't be a clearer difference between two candidates - on prosperity, security, character, or domestic issues.
To: GraniteStateConservative
You are being unduly harsh. There can be room for more than one leader.
Bush is putting the prestige of the presidency behind this proposed amendment. That alone constitutes leadership.
63
posted on
02/24/2004 7:41:27 AM PST
by
mwl1
To: mewzilla
You can run, Johnny, but you can't hide... But I'm not running OR hiding . . .
64
posted on
02/24/2004 7:42:43 AM PST
by
JohnnyZ
(People don't just bump into each other and have sex. This isn't Cinemax! -- Jerry)
To: Dr. Marten
I'm shocked, SHOCKED....
....that ABC News broke in on regular programming to carry these comments. They think it's a losing issue for Dubya.
Bwa ha ha ha ha ha!
65
posted on
02/24/2004 7:42:46 AM PST
by
Petronski
(John Kerry looks like . . . like . . . weakness.)
To: Remole
Remole is right: we need to change the terms of the debate from "Civil Rights" to the "Greater Good of our Children". Without this amendment, sooner or later our the message our government will be sending our children is that it makes NO DIFFERENCE whether you marry someone of the same sex or someone of the opposite sex.
To: GraniteStateConservative
I knew it wouldn't take long
67
posted on
02/24/2004 7:43:27 AM PST
by
MJY1288
(There's no leaders on the path of least resistance, ask John Kerry, he's been paving it for 32 yrs.)
To: Dr. Marten
This is good. Now if we could only get Bush to ban illegal immigration, call for the repeal of "campaign finance reform", reverse his position to support the Clinton gun ban, reverse his decision to increase funding for the National Endowment for the Arts, put the brakes on his massive spending proposals, etc......
To: GraniteStateConservative
Reflex criticism and objection merely marginalizes oneself.
To: Petronski
Do those jackasses really think this is a losing issue for GWB? Arrogant, elitist fools.
70
posted on
02/24/2004 7:44:18 AM PST
by
mwl1
To: Pyro7480
We shouldn't allow civil unions for gays either - period. There should be no sanction for homosexual behavior whatsoever. It is abomination.
To: Howlin
Thank you for the ping.
Howard Kaloogian who is running for the Senate has started a recall of our Attorney General today! He refuses to stop the San Francisco mess.
To: Califelephant
government will be sending our children is that it makes NO DIFFERENCE whether you marry someone of the same sex or someone of the opposite sex... or one, or two, or a dozen people,
or 21, 18, or 8 years old, (the left's ultimate goal),
or human or beast.
73
posted on
02/24/2004 7:45:02 AM PST
by
MrB
To: KevinDavis
Of course it will. You cannot make the mistake of believing there is any good will in that bunch.
74
posted on
02/24/2004 7:45:08 AM PST
by
justshutupandtakeit
(America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree: Bush must be destroyed.)
To: Dr. Marten
There is no way I will ever support monkeying with the Constitution for issues like this that clearly should be decided by the states.
This is precisely the sort of thing the Constitution's architects warned us to avoid.
I hold no malice toward those who seek to ban gay marriage at the federal level -- I oppose it, myself -- but this is just another step in a continuing trend away from a true republic consisting of sovereign states and toward a growing monolithic federal despotism that will spell the death of a free America.
With the notable exception of the first ten, virtually every amendment to the Constitution has resulted in far more harm than good. This would be no exception.
We don't need to concentrate more power in the federal government. It has far too much power already, through grant and usurpation, with potentially ruinous results if we do not reign it in while we still can (if we still can).
Opposition to gay marriage is legitimate. Buying into the idea that the federal government is the only government we have, and the only place for addressing issues that have always been the domain of the states is wrong-headed and dangerous.
I urge those supporting a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, or any modifications to the United States Constitution to carefully consider the dangerous consequences of taking such and approach.
75
posted on
02/24/2004 7:45:35 AM PST
by
Imal
(Ironically, there really is a vast, right-wing conspiracy.)
To: Petronski
I hope C-span re-runs this later tonight, I don't get FNC at work.
To: sinkspur
The Musgrave amendment is fine with me. If a majority of a state legislature wants civil unions, then they shall have them. But keep in mind, even the Vermont legislature was forced by the courts to decide in favor of civil unions. No state legislature has yet decided in favor of this on their own accord, other than California's domestic partner law -- one that contradicts the will of the people in California. But the people can change their voting habits to correct it if they so desire.
77
posted on
02/24/2004 7:46:10 AM PST
by
King Black Robe
(With freedom of religion and speech now abridged, it is time to go after the press.)
To: Wait4Truth
You are absolutely correct.
78
posted on
02/24/2004 7:46:40 AM PST
by
cyncooper
("Maybe they were hoping he'd lose the next Iraqi election")
To: Howlin
So you're here! There are only 3 threads on about this.
79
posted on
02/24/2004 7:46:49 AM PST
by
Peach
(The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
To: JohnnyZ
This is great. He's going to force Massachusetts ketchup boy to take a stand on the issue.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson