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

Skip to comments.

Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes in Senate
The Washington Times ^ | Jun 5, 2006 | LAURIE KELLMAN

Posted on 06/05/2006 10:00:29 AM PDT by kellynla

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush and congressional Republicans are aiming the political spotlight this week on efforts to ban gay marriage, with events at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue - all for a constitutional amendment with scant chance of passage but wide appeal among social conservatives.

"Ages of experience have taught us that the commitment of a husband and wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society," Bush said in his weekly radio address. "Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all."

The president was to make further remarks Monday in favor of the amendment as the Senate opened three days of debate. Neither chamber, though, is likely to pass the amendment by the two-thirds majority required to send it to the states - three quarters of which would then have to approve it.

Many Republicans support the measure because they say traditional marriage strengthens society; others don't but concede the reality of election-year politics.

"Marriage between one man and one woman does a better job protecting children better than any other institution humankind has devised," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn. "As such, marriage as an institution should be protected, not redefined."

But Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said he will vote against it on the floor but allowed it to survive his panel in part to give the Republicans the debate party leaders believe will pay off on Election Day. Specter has chosen a different battle with the Bush administration this week - a hearing Tuesday on the ways the FBI spies on journalists who publish classified information.

(Excerpt) Read more at ap.washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government
KEYWORDS: 109th; 2006trolls; arlensphincter; demagoguery; distraction; diversion; dogandponyshow; evasion; flimflam; fma; homosexualagenda; homosexuals; irrelevancy; lookingbusy; manbehindthecurtain; marriage; pandering; razzledazzle; socialliberals
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 321-333 next last
To: napscoordinator
Where is she registered? My wife and I have to get a gift out. You know this just does not interest me at all. Congratulations to her. Now really this is hurting us so much, how? I married in a Catholic Church so I go by the teachings, but not everyone is Catholic so they do their own thing. I don't get the worry about gay marriage.

Because once a state makes same sex marriage legal they can start teaching gay issues at any age in school. It will be impossible to shield your kids from this. It's already happening in Massachussets.

241 posted on 06/05/2006 6:38:53 PM PDT by stig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

Little Richard must be going on 70, so it would be back in the 1940s.

The stories are true enough. I don't view them as a symptom of utter closed mindedness, but rather communities maintaining norms. All communities, whether urban,rural or suburban, mold their own norms.


242 posted on 06/05/2006 6:42:02 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

p.s.

I believe that many of the more traditional norms and lifestyles typical of "small town America" are currently under attack by the media and have been for 30 years or so.


243 posted on 06/05/2006 6:44:38 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: Joan Kerrey

You, too, are commiting a Straw Man Fallacy.

Nobody is saying round them up and throw them in a concentration camp.

We are saying that it's come to a point in our society where we have to codify what we have acknowledged since the Constitution was written: that marriage is not a dog and a boy, not a monkey and a woman, not two men, not four men a cat and a woman ... but one man and one woman.

It has become imperative that we put a stake in the ground with these militant anti-family gays, and thereby protect the foundation of our society -- the family.

You, my friend, need to stop thinking merely of your and your family, and how this'll affect you, but start thinking of our society.


244 posted on 06/05/2006 6:49:12 PM PDT by Theo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

Bilbray or what'shername? And by how much?

[Tossup, but if I had to guess, Bilbray by 2%. Busby is dumb, and the recent flap over her comment that you don't need papers to vote, gets the word out a bit more about that.]

I'm checking your bonafides. See if you're still as good as ever.

Wife sleeping very early tonight. Not feeling well but nothing serious. So here I am, loaded for bear, or wolves, or annoying squirrels. I can handle any of 'em.

Did you know that in 16 of the 18 open seats for Congresscritter that Bush won by more than 59-41. That's a high bar for the dem wannabes, no?

[Yes, but the Dems have enough Pubbie incumbents in their cross hairs to get there I think. A lot of the incumbents in trouble are in marginal seats, or are tainted, or have a strong candidate against them, like Soudrel (the Bush numbers in Indiana are more reliable for a partisan baseline than Texas, but less reliable than most places), or are incumbents that have always been controversial and ideosyncratic like Hostettler. I will email you a spreadsheet that ranks the seats by Bush margins, with a numbers beside those I think might well go, as weak leans or tossups.]


245 posted on 06/05/2006 7:01:02 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: ModerateGOOPer
Libertarian does not equal liberal. It is, infact, the philosophy most in tune with our Founders.

Not really. You should examine their writings and the legislation they wrote more closely. They were not in the least shy about social policy. And they were not libertarians in the modern sense.
246 posted on 06/05/2006 7:03:31 PM PDT by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Where did you get your spreadsheet? I might convert it to HTML <table> format if it looks good. Should draw some interest here.
247 posted on 06/05/2006 7:05:56 PM PDT by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

I got the raw data emailed to me from a pal, and played with it, using the sort function.


248 posted on 06/05/2006 7:12:16 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: Torie

OK, I'll keep score. We'll see if you're ready for the pasture or the "show".


249 posted on 06/05/2006 7:14:38 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
I wouldn't suspend or ban any poster that doesn't leave a stench behind them. Hell, I want to convert them!

You could try. If they had open minds. But many infiltrators are only here to spew liberal policy dressed up in conservative language. It's about as phony as Hitlery talking about her Christian values.

Some you might convert. Others need to be ejected because they might make converts here or their liberal views may drive conservatives off the forum if enough of them were tolerated. And some of them come here just to troll so they can run back to DU or other liberal forums to ridicule FR or spew about it being a hate site. I suspect they come here to deliberately provoke people into unseemly language so they can depict FR as a hate site. This is one of the reasons I think that our mods don't tolerate liberal baiters.

On this issue, there's no great debate for us. President Bush opposes gay marriage. So does the GOP. So will our next presidential candidate. So will all our party leaders. So do the grassroots (and a lot of Dims too). So do the hard conservatives.

Some issues really are settled policy for us. Discussing them weakens us in an election year. Our policies and priorities are set for this election cycle. I, for one, am content on this issue. But I would prefer that we actually got the amendment through the Senate and out to the states.
250 posted on 06/05/2006 7:19:42 PM PDT by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

By the way, I count 7 open seats that Bush carried by less than 59%, and it is no accident that they are all in play: Cunningham (which I forgot to check), and then up the line, Nussle, Beauprez, Boehlert, Koble, Hyde, and Kennedy. It is no accident that all of those seats are seriously contested, with probably the first four having the Dem as the favorite, although one might argue about the Boehlert seat.


251 posted on 06/05/2006 7:23:56 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

Predicting things in the House this year is a bitch. The macro versus micro weightings are more guesses than anything else at this point. There will be a Dem macro swing, but will it be 2% or 5% (by that I mean the percentage the Dems gain, and the GOP loses)?


252 posted on 06/05/2006 7:26:44 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Seen this one?

Bilbray seems to have support from those who actually vote and Busby from that pool of voters who the dems rely on to vote but never seem to show up much.

Bilbray doubles his independent vote since the last poll.

How much does the Busby stupidity vis a vis illegal voting count for in that district?

253 posted on 06/05/2006 7:28:35 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: Torie

Rove said today on the radio that there were 16 and all had margins larger than 59 while there were 2 dem open seats where Kerry had margins of like 4. Perhaps I misheard or he misspoke. I'll go with what you say, you're more reliable than the Republican Party. :-}


254 posted on 06/05/2006 7:30:32 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Even if this amendment passed the Senate, passed the House, and was approved in all 50 states, it wouldn't matter. It would be held up in courts and liberal judges everywhere would declare this constitutional amendment UNconstitutional, and that would be that. I doubt that very many gays, activists or otherwise, are exactly quaking in their boots. They know they have the MSM, the courts, public education, Dems and RINOs on their side. What do they have to fear??


255 posted on 06/05/2006 7:39:57 PM PDT by ChocChipCookie (Democrats: soulless minions of orthodoxy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Ya, I saw the poll.

It is precisely the opposite actually: "By SurveyUSA's calculation, 20% of "today's" Likely Voters did not vote in the 4/11/06 Primary. Among these "new" voters, Bilbray leads by 11 points, 49% to 38%."

I think immigration is the only thing Bilbray has going for him, although he is careful not to say what happens to the illegals already here. But the Minutemen endorsed some third party guy, and Busby is running ads pointing that out: if you want a read meater, vote third party. Busby is hiding behind the McCain bill. I don't think immigration is as important in this district as many others, as an issue that moves the partisan balance much, because the Anglo Dems here tend to be quite wealthy, living on the beach types. In fact, the poorer you are, the more likely you are to vote for Bilbray. The Pubbies are becoming more and more the sans culotte party. :)

One thing the cross tabs of the poll show, is that the "conservative base," that some posters on this site suggest will do a dump on Bilbray, are all wet. But then, so when was that new, when it comes to them parsing psephology? Most of them don't have a clue, IMO.

256 posted on 06/05/2006 7:40:47 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: conservative blonde

Once gay marriage is legal in this country, and I believe we're fighting a losing battle against it, it is only a matter of time before we also lose true freedom of religion. That is the Evil One's ultimate goal, courtesy of gays and lesbians.


257 posted on 06/05/2006 7:42:28 PM PDT by ChocChipCookie (Democrats: soulless minions of orthodoxy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

I am just staring at the numbers on my spreadsheet. Maybe what Rove meant, is that there are only two open seats GOP seats that Bush lost, to wit, the Nussle seat, and the Beauprez seat. But you know from the list, that it is ludcrious to suggest Bush won any of them by 59%. The closest is the Kennedy seat at 57%.


258 posted on 06/05/2006 7:44:05 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: Torie
We disagree on the juice that is involved in the illegal issue. I think we'll have some indication of how it is playing tomorrow. I'll talk to you then.

Good night amigo.

259 posted on 06/05/2006 7:44:44 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

This special election race has nationwide attention for a reason. Every political junkie in the land will be watching it with bated breath.


260 posted on 06/05/2006 7:47:12 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 321-333 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