News & Politics - Bush administration considers same-sex marriage incompatible with "decent" society

Enigma, I.C. · 11-07-2004, 05:38 PM

Gee, they must really hate Canada where it's already legal in 6 provinces and the Yukon. Those of us in Canada I think can confidently assert that it hasn't destroyed Canadian society.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...sh_agenda_dc_3

Quote:

Bush to Seek Gay-Marriage Ban in New Term -Aide

1 hour, 23 minutes ago Top Stories - Reuters

By Randall Mikkelsen

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites) will renew a quest in his second term for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage as essential to a "hopeful and decent" society, his top political aide said on Sunday.

Bush's call for a constitutional ban on gay marriages failed last year in Congress, but his position was seen as a key factor motivating Christian conservatives concerned about "moral values" to turn out in large numbers and help supply Bush with a winning margin in last week's election.

"If we want to have a hopeful and decent society, we ought to aim for the ideal, and the ideal is that marriage ought to be, and should be, a union of a man and a woman," Bush political aide Karl Rove told "Fox News Sunday."

Rove said Bush would "absolutely" push the Republican-controlled Congress for a constitutional amendment, which he said was needed to avert the aims of "activist judges" who would permit gay marriages.

Renewing his push for an amendment -- despite its slim chances of success -- would be a way for Bush to reward his conservative base. The amendment would face a steep hurdle winning the needed approval of three-fourths of the states.

Other items on Bush's second-term agenda included nominating -- without a "litmus test" on abortion -- judges who would "strictly interpret" the Constitution, and tax reform. Rove said Bush wanted to review the tax code "in its entirety," which suggested a broad-based reform was possible.

Republicans' ability to deliver on their campaign agenda will help determine whether the party can realize its potential to retain a governing majority for decades, he said.

The gay-marriage issue leaped into the campaign spotlight this year after Massachusetts legalized the practice in response to a state Supreme Court ruling, and San Francisco began performing gay marriages in defiance of a state ban.

Ballot measures in 11 states to ban gay marriages all passed last week. Gay-rights groups have vowed to keep fighting for legal protections of same-sex relationships despite the election setbacks.

As a side note, all Massachusetts legislators who support same-sex marriage in that state were reelected and that issue has pretty much fizzled there because it's been a reality for 6 months and people have seen it hasn't caused boils to afflict them or fire to rain down from the sky. It's rather astonishing how people are so terrified of a hypothetical yet where it's a reality nobody cares.

*Ledi* · 11-07-2004, 05:40 PM

A smiley can sum up my emotions more than I could in words right now:

Lexis · 11-07-2004, 06:01 PM

So same sex couples who love each getting married is incompatible with a "hopeful and decent" society?

But the deaths of 100,000 Iraqi civilians, the deaths of servicemen and women from the coalition, civilians like Nick Berg and Ken Bigley - who the hell cares?

Cause, we all know that the homosexuals are MUCH more dangerous than global warming, rising healthcare costs, huge budget defecits and being mocked abroad for complete stupdity.

Seriously, why is this such a big deal? We got an Iraqi state of emergency, the upcoming battle of Fallujah, eight marines dead last week, three Black Watch soldiers dead this week...and gay marriage is the hot topic.

California_ here_ I _come · 11-07-2004, 07:20 PM

Thanks 4 posting the article. I'm glad Bush is trying for this again. He's got my support.

alli balli · 11-07-2004, 07:29 PM

It's too ridiculous for words. Why does half the country not see that the whole point of this amendment is to write blatant discrimination into our Constitution?

It's also sad that so much time and energy better spent on more pressing matters will be wasted on such a trivial issue.

I guess if we can have laws discriminating against "sinners" who love people of the same sex, we can also discriminate against other "sinners." Who's up for the "Anti-Greed Act"? Or the one that says you can't be lazy, or eat too much, or be too proud?

Lexis · 11-07-2004, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by California_ here_ I _come
He's got my support.

Could you elaborate please? I'd love to hear why you think it is a good idea to discriminate against a group of people for their sexuality.

Alli, Bush would never pass an "anti-greed" act - all his buddies (the ones that are responsible for melting the ice caps and poisoning people) would be carted off to jail!

I hear Blair is taking a trip to visit Bush soon - bet you he politely avoids that fact that his buddy is becoming as whacked out as those he claims to be fighting.

California_ here_ I _come · 11-07-2004, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lexis
Could you elaborate please? I'd love to hear why you think it is a good idea to discriminate against a group of people for their sexuality.

Alli, Bush would never pass an "anti-greed" act - all his buddies (the ones that are responsible for melting the ice caps and poisoning people) would be carted off to jail!

I hear Blair is taking a trip to visit Bush soon - bet you he politely avoids that fact that his buddy is becoming as whacked out as those he claims to be fighting.

Sure, I'll elaborate. I know this gets on a lot of people's nerves, but you did ask, so if you're offended...Anyways, I don't believe in same sex marriage b/c of my religion. I live my life by the Bible. Not to say I don't mess up, everyone does, but I try to go by it & what it says is right. It says same sex marriages aren't, & that marriage is only between a man & a woman. I agree with that statement. So I agree with Bush.

*Ledi* · 11-07-2004, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by California_ here_ I _come
Sure, I'll elaborate. I know this gets on a lot of people's nerves, but you did ask, so if you're offended...Anyways, I don't believe in same sex marriage b/c of my religion. I live my life by the Bible. Not to say I don't mess up, everyone does, but I try to go by it & what it says is right. It says same sex marriages aren't, & that marriage is only between a man & a woman. I agree with that statement. So I agree with Bush.

But some people don't give a crap about the bible, so why do you care if they get married? Why do other people have to live their lives how YOU want them to????

This is absurd. I cannot believe it.

Lexis · 11-07-2004, 08:31 PM

You totally have a right to follow what your religion teaches you and if you believe that gay marriage is wrong, then that's your decision. I don't know your orientation but if you were gay, then you would obviously not get married.

However, I do not believe in God. Thus I do not believe that same-sex marriage is wrong.

Now, we are both entitled to our own views. The difference is, my view does not hurt you. If I was a lesbian and chose to marry my partner, I can't see how that would damage you're life or your choice.

However, you're view would hurt me as it would prevent me marrying someone I loved, prevent me from declaring my commitment just as thousands of straight couples do every year.

Isn't that discrimination? Whatever about "all men are created equal"? Why should I be penalised because of your religious values.

And also, does the bible really say same-sex marriage is wrong? I thought it only mentioned man shall not lie with man.

California_ here_ I _come · 11-07-2004, 08:31 PM

I know not everyone goes by the Bible. That's a given. And if I say it's ok to have same sex marriages then I'll be turning my back on my religion. I would never do that.

California_ here_ I _come · 11-07-2004, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lexis
You totally have a right to follow what your religion teaches you and if you believe that gay marriage is wrong, then that's your decision. I don't know your orientation but if you were gay, then you would obviously not get married.

However, I do not believe in God. Thus I do not believe that same-sex marriage is wrong.

Now, we are both entitled to our own views. The difference is, my view does not hurt you. If I was a lesbian and chose to marry my partner, I can't see how that would damage you're life or your choice.

However, you're view would hurt me as it would prevent me marrying someone I loved, prevent me from declaring my commitment just as thousands of straight couples do every year.

Isn't that discrimination? Whatever about "all men are created equal"? Why should I be penalised because of your religious values.

And also, does the bible really say same-sex marriage is wrong? I thought it only mentioned man shall not lie with man.

It doesn't damage my life at all. But as said in my post replying to Ledi. If I said it was ok I'd be turning my back on my religion. And yes, the bible says no man should lie with another man. Which is saying being gay is wrong. And if the Bible says being gay is wrong, I don't think it would agree with gay marriages. And a lot of times gay people, or not gay people, say they respect my religion. If they respect it, how come they keep saying it's wrong to discriminate against them because of it? If they really respected me they wouldn't expect me to go against what I believe just because it hurts them.

ceilirose · 11-07-2004, 08:35 PM

I think that polluted water sources and toxins in food have the potential to affect people's lives more than allowing gay marriage. We all have to drink and eat to survive and if those sources become scarce or are continually compromised where will we all be in another 50 years?

What's next? Banning divorce? Limiting marriage to people of child bearing age?

I read somewhere in some blog today that Bush got 20% of the gay/lesbian vote. Amazing. The question is why?

*Ledi* · 11-07-2004, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by California_ here_ I _come
I know not everyone goes by the Bible. That's a given. And if I say it's ok to have same sex marriages then I'll be turning my back on my religion. I would never do that.

As long as you don't marry another person of the same sex, I don't see how you'd be turning your back on your religion.

***Raonaild*** · 11-07-2004, 08:36 PM

I think it's fine if religions define marriage as strictly between a man and a woman. But it isn't fine to encode that into law and impose it on everybody else. It especially isn't fine to create a constitutional amendment imposing it based strictly on religious arguments.

Marriage has a legal meaning as well as a religious one. They should call the legal state of marriage something else, to make that totally clear.

This same sex marriage issue should be like Catholicism not recognizing divorce ... it's not allowed in that religion, but it doesn't stop anyone outside the religion from legally getting divorced.

Lexis · 11-07-2004, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by California_ here_ I _come
I know not everyone goes by the Bible. That's a given. And if I say it's ok to have same sex marriages then I'll be turning my back on my religion. I would never do that.

You don't have to turn your back on your religion or say that its OK to have same sex marriage.

But what about tolerance and understanding?

I really would love to hear your response to the question: why should other people live by the rules of a God they don't believe in? If you want to live by the bible, go ahead. It's not fair to force others.

But discrimination is wrong and unfair. Homosexuality is not a choice (the gay penguins) and really, is it really that important?


Fan Forum > General Discussion > News & Politics > Bush administration considers same-sex marriage incompatible with "decent" society