Bush, Senators Renew Fight Against Gay Marriage...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Jun 5 2006, 03:52 PM) [snapback]266145[/snapback]</div>

Agree.

The left always lecture us about the importance of dissent, opinion polls, the voice of the people.

WELL,

Let ALL the people voice their beliefs and vote on it - but then again the left won't want that if they think they will lose at the ballot box.

and while they are at it we should all vote on Roe vs. Wade. State by State.

or, is the Left trying to protect us for our own good. They are so hypocritical.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Jun 5 2006, 03:52 PM) [snapback]266145[/snapback]</div>

Forgot, each and every state where it was put up for a vote it LOST! So the left won't want us all to vote on it for our own good

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jun 5 2006, 04:07 PM) [snapback]266159[/snapback]</div>

Good argument. And if the citizens of Alabama vote to make interracial marriage illegal, I suppose you would support that as well.

The purpose of the Constitution is to protect the minority from suppression by the majority.

 

Refer to the thread about wedge issue...

 

The issue of gay marriage aside.....does anyone else out there smell "opportunism"? Since Republicans wrested control of both branches of government we've seen:
1. Wholesale disregard for Constitutional rights and amendments already in place.
2. An endless and meaningless war that has killed thousands US soldiers, countless thousands of innocent
Iraqis and left us hated by the world. In addition to bankrupting us.
3. A non-stop assault on the environment for the benefit of corporate greed, disgused as "economic
growth".
4. Deficts larger than any in history, making us, in effect, the world's greatest debtor nation. What happens
when China, Japan and Europe decide not to bankroll our excesses?
5. Rampant Congressional, Presidential and corporate corruption that amounts to selling the nation's
natural resources and environment to corporate assholes like Exxon/Mobil.
6. The gutting of the middle class in favor of the top ten percent of the population. How many people do
know who are relatively debt free?
7. Serious tampering with the voting process and Congressional re-districting.
8. An arrogant and isolationist foreign policy that cannot truly benefit us in the long run, and makes us
despised in the short run.
9. A gross "dumbing down" of the political discourse that should be the core of a vibrant democracy.
10. A President (and Cabinet) who have lied so repeatedly that it has become pointless to listen.

And now.....let's go after a group that everyone can stomp on painlessly. "Jesus, Inc.", headed by such moral midgets as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson have made millions championing "decency" at the expense of gay people, while blithly ignoring and even abetting the Iraqi war, the above mentioned items 1 thru 10, and wrapping their excesses in the name of Jesus.

Bush has reached a new low for a bottom dweller....and now he needs to rally the faithful with a courageous stand against gay people in order to look like a leader.

The issue of marriage should probably be debated, but to enact the first Constitutional amendment that would LIMIT rights, is not the way to do it.

Bob

 

It is so funny to see the righties run back to their classic wedge issues.

Suddenly, after two years of not bringing it up, gay marriage is an issue. How do gays getting married affect you again?

Because the right has proven itself so completely incompentent, they have to go to the Christian right with these issues.

Gay adoption, gay marriage, flag burning.

Real important things in the year 2006.

What about a living wage? How about the environment, affordable health care? The right is instead focusing on this stuff?

WHAT A JOKE!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jun 5 2006, 04:07 PM) [snapback]266159[/snapback]</div>

I have a better idea. How about we have a constitutional republic with three branches of government; executive, legislative and judicial.
Oh wait, thats what we have now. Sounds like you want a different system of government...

Whatever, but the gay issue is a classic wedge issue, and I think it is a despicable, discraceful waste of our governments time to be spent on such devisive and hatefull BS. And I will refuse to vote for any elected official who choses to so waste his or her time and my money.

 

WTG! Great diversionary tactic. Get minds off of our spouses, parents and children dying in Iraq; off of the people facing another Hurricane season while living in Fema trailers, often far from home; off of corporate crime and the CEO's ties to government; off of the deficit, off of the ongoing legalization of environmental destruction and of, well, on and on......

 

The will of the people? There's a lot of spin going on in the statements... take for example Bush saying the average percentage those in support of a gay marriage ban in states that have adopted constitutional amendments citing marriage as union between man/woman... he said it was 71%... the problem with the statistic is that the states that have those amendments are more socially conservative and because of that are apt to have higher percentages of gay marriage constitutional bans, and all the more likely to have passed such legislation.

I think that at least 35-40% (a VERY conservative figure) of the population is probably against this measure... hence why it failed to pass in '04 and why it is expected to fail now.

If the amendment passes, I sincerely feel that the US will have fallen into the Dark Ages (relatively speaking , of course).... in which religious dogma has violated the separation of church and state to impose its will on the people.

With STATE constitutional amendments, one may more effectively argue that the amendments in some form of another reflect the will of the people. As a NATIONAL constitutional amendment, this is a ludicrous statement at best.

THIS GOES WAY TOO FAR!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Jun 5 2006, 03:52 PM) [snapback]266145[/snapback]</div>

 

Gay marriage today ... then let's trot out the flag burning "issue" .... gee, there must be an election coming up. Can a heightened terror alert be far behind? Say, after Labor Day?

 

At least these criminals are predictable

 

How is it the will of the people when there is no huge landslide for or against the motion?

Would it not be more reflective of the will of the people if the states decided so through their own state constitutional amendments?

Why make it a national constitutional proposal?

If it fails again, then is that not the will of the people?

Why was it not the will of the people when the motion in '04 failed?
-----
Regarding the proposed amendment... are civil unions still possible between gays?

 

I'm gratified to see that now that Congress and the President have solved our problems with energy resources and our future, the deficit is gone and there is a healthy surplus and a balanced budget, the war is over and we have withdrawn and left a viable, thriving democratic government in Iraq, and every working American and their family members have affordable quality healthcare, they have time to stick their noses in our bedrooms again.

Oh......hmmmm.

BTW if the will of the people is so sacred.....why not follow the will of the people regarding INCOME TAX. How many people really want to pay it? To the Feds or the State? How about sales tax? How about property tax?

Bush's approval rating is 36%; that means 64% of the people don't approve.

How about the will of the people there? Gonna resign, George? Not even if it's the will of the people?

Oh.....hmmmm.

 

We are heading back into the dark ages aren't we?
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-...transcript.html

The Bill of Rights: A Transcription

Note: The following text is a transcription of the first ten amendments to the Constitution in their original form. These amendments were ratified December 15, 1791, and form what is known as the "Bill of Rights."

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

 

It must be voting time again!!!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Jun 5 2006, 03:52 PM) [snapback]266145[/snapback]</div>

He wasn't complaining about overreaching judges back in 2000!

If they were serious about saving the institution of marrage how about an amendment that eliminated divorce!

But, wait, isn't getting a divorce a past time for a number of congressmen?

 

yeah more bush bashing, it seems is a requirement here...

So be it let them marry just dont let them divorce...

 

I just have to wonder, how stupid does the Bush administration think that their right-wing religious base is? They did the same thing before the 2004 elections, trotting out the gay-bashing amendment to get all the fundamentalists out to the polls. Then after the election, not a word about the amendment. Until now, coincidentally before another election (and Tony Snow can say with a straight face that timing has nothing to do with Bush proposing this amendment again. No wonder they hired Snow- he can lie with the best of them.)
There's no way that this amendment will ever pass, but it will serve to get a lot of the religious right out to the polls (those with short memories), and that's all they care about. So what if they are using a segment of the population as pawns in their attempt to retain control of Congress- they will stop at nothing.

The Constitution is meant to protect civil liberties, not to deny them.