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

This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.
Locked on 07/13/2004 10:03:56 AM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:

Troll magnet, posted by troll.



Skip to comments.

Lynne Cheney differs with VP on Gay Marriage
The Baltimore Sun ^ | July 12, 2004 | Associated Press (no author listed)

Posted on 07/12/2004 12:45:33 PM PDT by RavenMoon

WASHINGTON - Lynne Cheney, the vice president's wife, said yesterday that states should have the final say over the legal status of personal relationships. The Cheneys have a lesbian daughter.

That stand puts her at odds with the vice president on the need for the constitutional amendment now debated in the Senate that effectively would ban gay marriage.

"I think that the constitutional amendment discussion will give us an opportunity to look for ways to discuss ways in which we can keep the authority of the states intact," Cheney told CNN's Late Edition.

The Senate began debate Friday on an amendment that defines marriage as a union of a man and woman as husband and wife.

(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: fma; gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; lynnecheney; prisoners; samesexmarriage; statesrights
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-120 next last
To: RavenMoon
Lynne Cheney, the vice president's wife, said yesterday that states should have the final say over the legal status of personal relationships.

Sorry, Lynn, no one elected you, and it appears that's a good thing.
The queers are already suing to over ride state laws on the subject. An amendment is the only option.

21 posted on 07/12/2004 1:09:01 PM PDT by concerned about politics ( Liberals are still stuck at the bottom of Maslow's Hierarchy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SandyInSeattle
SandyInSeattle wrote: The wives are certainly entitled to have their own opinions about issues.

Oh definitely. This isn't Stepford! I've always meant to read that so I finally picked up the movie tie-in copy. I think some might critique any political spouse, male or female, for speaking his or her mind because it might imply that the politician agrees. I think this is narrow and unfair. If she wants to have a different opinion, let her express it.

Personally, I have no problem with gay marriage but then I'm obviously biased. I'd rather see that than promiscuity, to be honest, and men in general, gay or straight, seem to have such a propensity to towards that. Even mega-conservative radio host Jay Severin was saying something like that men wanted sex from women as soon as possible and went on to say something to the effect of "if you're on the fifth date and you haven't asked for physical intimacy from the woman, you're not metrosexual. You're homosexual." Add to that the number of women he implied bedding in any given year (I notice nobody was calling into question his subject matter with the fcc) and I take it he's not exactly pro-monogomy either.

Alas, I think most issues relating to sex are complex.
22 posted on 07/12/2004 1:10:41 PM PDT by RavenMoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: george wythe

"I'm in favor of amending the composition of the US Supreme Court, not the US Constitution. I would fire a few justices who are out of control."

How do you propose "firing" a few justices?


23 posted on 07/12/2004 1:12:26 PM PDT by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RavenMoon

Then Utah should be allowed to have polygamy again. Geesh....Gay Marriage Legalized will be the FINAL nail in our coffin. USA....RIP.


24 posted on 07/12/2004 1:13:05 PM PDT by Claire Voyant ((visualize whirled peas))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RavenMoon

I wonder if Ms. Cheney thinks Utah should have been allowed to join the Union without being forced to ban polygamy.


25 posted on 07/12/2004 1:13:14 PM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real political victory, take your issue to court.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conserv13

just so long as you are prepared then for the full gay agenda to be taught in public school. because once gay marriage is legalized, there is then no basis to say that it must be silenced in the schools. your 3rd grader will be told that Eddie can marry Bobby, and its no different then Eddie marrying Susie.


26 posted on 07/12/2004 1:13:26 PM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RavenMoon

no, Rudy is against gay marriage, he is for civil unions.


27 posted on 07/12/2004 1:14:04 PM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RavenMoon
Maybe Lynne needs to study her Constitution. If you look at the amendment process, it sure seems to me like it'll be up to the states one way or the other:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

28 posted on 07/12/2004 1:14:55 PM PDT by Huck (I love the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Claire Voyant
Then Utah should be allowed to have polygamy again.

Denying them their lifestyle choice would be discriminatory. They're waiting for their turn. Litigation is expensive. Let the other sexually dysfunctional groups clear the way. It's cheaper.

29 posted on 07/12/2004 1:15:37 PM PDT by concerned about politics ( Liberals are still stuck at the bottom of Maslow's Hierarchy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
just so long as you are prepared then for the full gay agenda to be taught in public school. because once gay marriage is legalized,

The North American Man/Boy Love Association can adopt their very own sex toys.

30 posted on 07/12/2004 1:17:39 PM PDT by concerned about politics ( Liberals are still stuck at the bottom of Maslow's Hierarchy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: truth_seeker
How do you propose "firing" a few justices?

Impeach them.

Using foreign law to excuse their blatant disregard of the US Constitution is an impeachable offense.

If it is not, then it should be.

I'm "george wythe" and I approved this message.

31 posted on 07/12/2004 1:17:39 PM PDT by george wythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: HenryLeeII
I have been willing to compromise to your position, but what I really think is that this is an issue in which we need uniformity. Utah could not join the Union unless they banned polygamy, so the precident exists for uniformity.

Still, I can live with each state legislature having final say. This requires, however, that we use different wording for the sake of fluidity. That means that marriage is marriage as it has been for 5,000, and state legislatures can create civil unions that equal marriage if they want to. Make no mistake, civil unions are marriage. But you can't really offer states a choice if you are going to call them by the exact same name. It would be total confusion.

32 posted on 07/12/2004 1:18:04 PM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real political victory, take your issue to court.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics

actually, its their own line of textbooks I am concerned about.


33 posted on 07/12/2004 1:19:17 PM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: RavenMoon
I'd say this is definitely an R vs D issue. I visited gay pride in CR Ia a few years ago and a local democrat politician was warning the gays about those politicians that wanted to dictate to them who they slept with. This is not a true statement but he was certainly putting a line in the sand. At the end of his speach he said "What ever it is that you people do when your out tonight..just enjoy yourself".

So there he was totally condoning whatever they were going to do and yes there was a sexual connotation. I find the majority of Democrats I meet are not Christians and the majority of Christians I know who are serious about the bible are Republicans. We would never publically or officially condone gays.

34 posted on 07/12/2004 1:20:50 PM PDT by biblewonk (WELL I SPEAK LOUD, AND I CARRY A BIGGER STICK...AND I USE IT TOO.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
oceanview wrote: "no, Rudy is against gay marriage, he is for civil unions."

Oh, I never meant to imply he was pro gay marriage, just that he was "supportive of gays" in the sense that he wouldn't not be friends with them or have them over for dinner or whatever. That sorta thing.
35 posted on 07/12/2004 1:23:11 PM PDT by RavenMoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: *Homosexual Agenda; EdReform; scripter; GrandMoM; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; ...

Homosexual Agenda Ping - So Mrs. Cheney apparently doesn't agree with the Veep. Too bad. She's not an elected official so I don't care much what her opinion is. Hope Mr. Cheney doesn't care either.

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

P.S. Some things should not be states' rights issues. Homoseuxal marriage, abortion, slavery, murder - these are some.


36 posted on 07/12/2004 1:24:10 PM PDT by little jeremiah ("You're possibly the most ignorant, belligerent, and loathesome poster on FR currently." - tdadams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
There is no need to impugn the entire state of Utah. Most LDS do not believe in polygamy.
37 posted on 07/12/2004 1:24:18 PM PDT by annyokie (Now with 20% More Infidel!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: HenryLeeII
States should have the final say in something like this...

In a former and better time I would have agreed. Unfortunately, the classic "states' rights" position has been overtaken by events. Here in Michigan, where I live, we'll probably pass a defense of marriage law this fall. But what good is it if we're eventually strong-armed into accepting a law made in Boston, Massachussetts? It's not just that 4 unelected judges in Massechussetts can make the law for its own citizens; they can make the law for the citizens of, say, southwestern Michigan.

For those who think amending the constitution is extreme, it is--but I would argue that the crisis forced on us by the gay gestapo is the kind of situation that merits extreme action. Of course, the easiest expedient is to restrict federal courts with a Senate vote. That, however, is only a stopgap measure. The gay marriage train needs to be derailed now.

38 posted on 07/12/2004 1:24:41 PM PDT by ishmac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: HenryLeeII
Precident - precedent

LOL!

39 posted on 07/12/2004 1:25:13 PM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real political victory, take your issue to court.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RavenMoon

It's a cut and dried issue for conservatives. Not all Republicans are conservatives, unfortunately.


40 posted on 07/12/2004 1:25:43 PM PDT by little jeremiah ("You're possibly the most ignorant, belligerent, and loathesome poster on FR currently." - tdadams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-120 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