Gay Marriage Ban Short of Votes in Senate

The Washington Times ^ | Jun 5, 2006 | LAURIE KELLMAN

[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.

[jwalsh07]

Western culture was defined by greek philosophy and roman law, both cultures accepted homosexuality. It wasn't untill the third branch, the judeo-christian religion came into play that homosexuality started to be persecuted.

Right, things were so much easier when the Spartans took boy toys along on the march. Great for the liberty of the Spartans, not so great for the boy's liberty perhaps.

[jwalsh07]

There was a time when libertarians were welcome in the party, ala Barry Goldwater.

Oh well, that open borders thing is not all the rage these days. Perhaps after reconquista is a done deed open border whackjobs will once again be welcome in the "party', whatever the hell that is.

[George W. Bush]

There was a time when libertarians were welcome in the party, ala Barry Goldwater. Now, though, the modern Republican party seems to be increasingly a vehicle for big government.

Barry Goldwater was a conservative. He got a bit libertarian in his dotage though.

As for the modern GOP and big government, I agree. But that is because I'm a conservative more than a Republican. The difference between us is that what you call liberty is to me libertine.

To pretend that the Founders were some pack of hip dudes who didn't adhere to and ruthlessly impose certain ideas about society is sheer ignorance. It's an attempt to make your history book into a mirror.

Being libertarian is fine as a political philosophy. But it never has and never will rule the Republican party. From our beginnings, there has always been a component of morality and social justice in the GOP.

If you're a Libertarian, why are you so ashamed of it? And why pretend to be a Republican?

[George W. Bush]

Are you sure you're not a fascist who claims to be a conservative?

Yet another statement very unusual for this forum. Your language is very very similar to the denizens of DU. You consistently advocate liberal positions and attack conservatives using the language of the Left.

You'd be more at home back at DU.

[durasell]

Yet another statement very unusual for this forum. Your language is very very similar to the denizens of DU. You consistently advocate liberal positions and attack conservatives using the language of the Left.

You'd be more at home back at DU.





Good way to build the conservative party base...by saying, "You don't think like you should on one issue. Go vote for the other guy."

[jwalsh07]

Do you even know what the religious meaning of free will is? Free will is a permission of god for men to live their lives as they see fit (judgement is supposed to come later). Not allowing gay marriage is an attack on free will :D want to go against the word of god?

This one ranks right up there with the all time worse.

God's judgement comes later, Caesar's is a bit more contemporary. In America we are free to worship the Lord, not so free to break the laws of man. Marriage in America is licensed, that licensing is done by the states, as it should be. The laws regarding licensing are passed by legislators elected by their constitutents. Every law, yes every law, has a moral component and liberty interests that are not defined as fundamental rights either by tradition of explicit constitutional language are the province of the people of those states.

Comprende'?

[ex-snook]

"Every time two sexual deviants get married, in nothing more than a blatant attempt to convince themselves and others that they are normal, it makes a mockery of marriage."

You nailed it. Government approval provides an acceptance of their practices which they could do without a government blessing. They want deviancy accepted.

[durasell]

Every law, yes every law, has a moral component



What about tax laws, SEC rules and parking violations?

[ModerateGOOPer]

People who park in my parking space are going to HELL. So, yes.

[jwalsh07]

They all have moral compnenets and if you think real, real hard about it you will probably figure it out. But if you can't, you let me know and I'll elucidate the matter for you.

[ladyinred]

There certainly should be enough votes to pass this bill. It seems we have those who are afraid special interest groups won't vote for them. Better to think only of themselves obviously.

[durasell]

I love these threads. They crack me up.

What some people don't get is that there's no changing the mind of someone who doesn't like gay guys/gals. It ain't gonna happen.

[George W. Bush]

Good way to build the conservative party base...by saying, "You don't think like you should on one issue. Go vote for the other guy."

Not at all. Accusing Republicans or conservatives of being fascist is never seen here on FR. This a word used almost exclusively by the Left.

[ModerateGOOPer]

durasell,

I think you nailed it right on the head. I think a lot of the debate is not driven on the rational merits of the action, but on the emotional buttons it pushes.

[George W. Bush]

Aker: Free will is a permission of god for men to live their lives as they see fit (judgement is supposed to come later).

He doesn't even grasp the meaning of free will among Chistians so you're way beyond his depth. Again, I'm not sure I've ever seen FReepers this clueless about Christianity, about conservatism, about the historic stands of the Grand Old Party.

Where's a Viking Kitty when you need them?

[durasell]

Well yeah. Talk to gay guys of a "certain age" and you'll find a lot of them were tossed from their homes either after high school or college. I had a couple gay friends who had fathers who tried to beat the gay out of them...closed fists and workboot beatings (Not a lot of success with that method). And then tossed out. Basically they were purged from their communities.

Anyway, this thing goes back down to the states. Some states ban "gay marriage" and some adopt it through vague legality or outright. And everyone gets to go on about their lives.

[jwalsh07]

Here, try this for a non religious reason to oppose expanding the definition of marriage. Certainly if homosexual "marriage" is a fundamental right then so is polygamy, polyamory et al.

In fact, expanding the meaning of marriage can not be constrained by sexuality at all. For instance, if the liberty interest in question is as Justice Kennedy says, a transcendent thingamabob based on love then certainly one can "marry" one of his or her grandkids before he or she checks out so the grandkid gets social security survivors benefits for the rest of his or her life. And that little scam can then be repeated in perputuity, or at least until the trough runs dry when everybody catches on.

Likewise and two or more people can "marry" to get their sticky little fingers into the public trough and then should be able to do so with impunity so long as they profess the love of their temporary spouse??? and liberty.

I mean what the hell, what's good for one is good for all.

[jwalsh07]

Loons from the left side of the Bell Curve. Way left.

[jwalsh07]

Well yeah. Talk to gay guys of a "certain age" and you'll find a lot of them were tossed from their homes either after high school or college

LOL, in "the day", that was actually the normal way of the world. You reach the age of majority you make your own way in the world.

[durasell]

Yeah those were the days...it's been a constant and very annoying theme in the lives of a lot of gay guys who come to the big city that they're A)"conflicted" with their home town or B) have unfinished issues with their fathers, etc.

My advice is always the same. A)buy a postcard. B)The guy beat the crap out of you, write him off. He's an imbecile. C)I'm sorry, I had trouble hearing your tale of woe in this $5 million loft apartment, maybe the $2 million art collection on the walls absorbed the sound of your whining voice.