Gay rights advocates decry Bush's 'desperate act'

Washington Times ^ | 2/25/04 | Cheryl Wetzstein

[kattracks]

President Bush's call yesterday for Congress to pass a federal marriage amendment was denounced as a "cheap" political ploy by homosexual rights activists, who pledged to work with their allies in Congress to defeat it.

"This is a desperate act by a desperate president. ... Shame on him," Cheryl Jacques, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said at a press conference with several homosexual couples and their children.

[Jmouse007]

The more they scream and complain against Bush and traditional marriage the more votes the democratic party will lose come November.

Don't you just love it :o)

[Betaille]

"The federal marriage amendment in Congress is a "defective remedy," said Sandy Rios, president of Concerned Women for America, which has proposed an alternative marriage amendment that clarifies that marriage benefits cannot be given to unmarried persons."

Please... we will never agree on EVERY WORD. We have to be united on this. The proposed amendment would define marriage and leave up to states decisions about civil benefits, etc...
There is nothing wrong with that. While I agree with what CWA is saying, it is not fundamental enough a difference to justify ruining our chance to pass a very important amendment. We can not be divided on this.

[RedMonqey]

Mayor of QueerTown says it is discrimination for one gay man who loves another gay man to be denied a marriage linese.

Why isn't it discrimintory for THREE(or more) gay men to marry(polygamy)?

When he is rarily asked, he dodges the question as a "red hering"

[William Martel]

Now, this whole issue is a load of crap if I ever heard one.

Leave it to liberals to raise an issue, rub our faces in it, and then blame us for taking action to protect ourselves from their aggression.

I swear, I'd love to see this blow up in their faces SO BAD...and I have a feeling it will.

[MadMoo]

Hump!

[hatfieldmccoy]

Hmmmm, I'm thinking this should have a link to the beaver story.....

[hunter112]

The more they scream and complain against Bush and traditional marriage the more votes the democratic party will lose come November.

They've got one last weapon, and if things start to go against them, I see them using it under certain conditions.

Say the MA legislature puts together a gay marriage ban for their Constitution, especially one with no civil union provision. Say further that the CA Supreme Court shuts down SF's issuance of licenses, and even imposes a criminal sanction on Newsom. No one else in the US in a position of authority comes out as being OK with gay marriage, and even Kerry just says, no FMA, but doesn't budge on gay marriage.

The last thing the gay rights movement will do is to encourage every last gay person to come out of the closet, full speed ahead. There will be people that every one of us works with, lives near, or is related to. If the numbers are anything close to the ten percent they've long insisted (no, I don't believe it either, but it could be five percent), it will send major shock waves throughout this country, and will leave a lot of people reeling.

Where they wind up after the spinning stops is the future of gay marriage in this country.

[King Prout]

line one: agreed
line two: agreed
line three: I hope so

[longtermmemmory]

Growing majority of 61% and Bush is the desperate one?

I seems that homosexuals are the ones getting desperate.

This is a dealbreaker issue. Bush saw this, homosexuals now see this, Kerry FEARS this.

Homosexual activists expected that they could slip this by the public. Pass homosexual marriage in one state, then quietly use FFC to imposit this on the nation at large. They did not expect anyone to notice. They expected to be able to marginalize objectors as "religious kooks". (see rooney of 60 min infamy). Even OReily does not get it. He is stuck on the religion issue.

They will blame religious zelots, they will blame right wing ignramuses, they will blame mel gibson and his 12 children, they will refuse to accept the fact that a SEX behvior does not entitle anyone to marriage.

[Reactionary]

"Homosexual activists expected that they could slip this by the public. Pass homosexual marriage in one state, then quietly use FFC to imposit this on the nation at large."

Yes, that's how liberals operate these days. Like the fascists before them they care nothing for the will of the people; they impose the rule of law by judicial fiat.

[longtermmemmory]

The homosexuals brief in lawrence said 2.7% at most.


I look to see them outing as many as possible as the votes get closer. Many in hollyweird will be outed voluntarily or involuntarily. Quite possibly some will do career kamikazi public outings to try and get support by feeeeeelings.

Look for a SYMPATHY RIBBON!!!!! (s) Something lacy with fusia. I will just scream, deeeevine. (/s)

[King Prout]

studies indicate it is about 2%.

not all gays support gay marriage.

not all gays take their marching orders from the extremist clowns primping and nancing in the spotlight. I know several gays (about half of all the gays I have ever known) who would say words to the effect of "Let those ----sucking f------ try that bull---- in MY town, and I'd help the breeders string 'em up." That, by the way, is an exact quote, minus the... ah... emphasis.

Y'see, there are quite a few gays who are realists, and know this isn't about equality, but is instead a "progressivist" statist powergrab in the middle of a culture war... a war they want no part of.

[longtermmemmory]

I will believe that when a see a group of homosexuals with a commercial on TV saying "We are homosexuasl who support the Federal Marriage amendment. We agree, Marriage should be one man and one woman."

Where are the out of the closet homosexuals? I have yet to see one on the mainstream media. CNN will make sure of that. They have focust on showing homosexual kiss after homosexual kiss. Gross.

[hunter112]

The homosexuals brief in lawrence said 2.7% at most.

And it might just be, but chances are that's not an even percentage throughout the country. No doubt its higher in some states than others. In any case, if a gay person lives a publically celibate life (engaging only in anonymous sexual behavior, or finding partners over the Internet in non-public places) they can "pass" (as blacks used to call it) for straight. It's not like doing a numerical count for a census with race. Even that's getting tough, with some people refusing to fully identify their ethnic heritage.

In any case, if things go badly for the gay marriage movement, look for the leaders of the movement to encourage gays to out themselves, kind of a "our backs are against the wall," kind of appeal. It might work, expectations have been raised since November, and if they are dashed, it might embolden more than it discourages. And look for the media to be quite sympathetic, maybe even Dan Rather, Peter Jennings and Tom Brokaw will all wear the fuchia ribbons!

[hunter112]

not all gays support gay marriage.

I don't doubt that there are gays who think and speak as you recount. Surely, there were black people forty years ago who did not want white people considering them "uppity", because they knew what some white people did to "uppity" Negroes. But the blacks had a Martin Luther King to encourage them to rise above that, all the gay marriage movement needs is its own martyr, and Gavin Newsom in handcuffs might do it for them.

[King Prout]

what I know is not dependent upon your belief.
I cannot force you to accept my apocryphal statements as fact - nor would I desire you to feel you are obliged to do so.
The gays I have described are not and will never be featured on the mainstream media or the gay blogosphere, because their views and attitudes do not please the elite.
Surely you are familiar with the way the media elite skews the news?

[King Prout]

oh, dear christ, you did NOT just equate the civil rights movement with gay agitation, did you? where was your sarcasm tag?
The two social struggles are incomparable, in terms of both size and inherent justice.

[Cronos]

Bush: "I've said it right from the beginning, I'm opposed to this"
Kerry: "Uh, ah. I think it's good. No, wait, Bush said it's bad, so I say it's bad too. Oh, you are the GL Front. Then I think it's good."
Does anyone need any more reasons to vote for Dubya?

[backtothestreets]

There will be an amendment BUT...

This would never have occurred had the social engineering politicians of generations past and present kept their noses out of marriage in the first place.

If this were about anything other then money, it would have been an issue years ago when the "marriage tax penalty" was in place.  It is only an issue now because current tax laws have swung the other way.

If there weren't so many people wanting government money, the best way to end this issue would be to end all tax benefit and entitlement programs dealing with marriage.

Marriage is a religious institution that has been turned into a state institution.  There should be no marriage license fees (a nominal fee to record the marriage only), and that's it.  The government needs to get out of the marriage business, not more deeply involved.