Bush calls for same-sex marriage-ban amendment

[panzerkw]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/24/elec04.prez.bush.marriage/index.html

It's about to get real ugly folks.

Personally, I don't believe that the constitution should be amended for something like this.

[TheBaron]

must resist urge to fly to washington and kick him in the nuts
urge... rising!!! RISING!!!

[primesuspect]

What utter arrogance. To think that he wishes to amend the Constitution of the United States of America (which is a document that stands for freedom and equality) to TAKE AWAY FREEDOM AND EQUALITY makes me sick to my stomach.

[-tk]

dude, wtf, arent there more important issuses to worry about than this?!?!? seriously.....

[khan]

were osama and saddam trying to tie the knot in a bizzare gay marriage scandal? if so i'm all for this amendment. its the only way to stop their mutant terrorist offspring from controlling the planet.

[primesuspect]

Oh yeah, Khan... I caught that on the cover of Weekly World News... Their love child is the antichrist, so I guess we better ban antichrists while we're at it..

[Templar]

Re-election? Haha.. Yeah right..

Did anyone even see this coming? This sounds like it just came out of the blue..

[Leonardo]

Homosexual, lesbian, polygamist, polyandrist, and sibling marriage are definitely issues that deserve thoughtful, careful debate; but I'm not sure it's an issue that should be treated by the US Constitution.

As far as liberty is concerned: ANY law is a check on liberty. Pure, complete liberty is anarchy.

[keto]

Well said, Lynn.

We are going thru the same thing in Canada. It's taking up TONS of government time, at all levels, and TONS of court time, at various levels.

Regardless of my personal beliefs, the money being spent has about a gazillion better uses than arguing this out in such a protracted manner.

[Leonardo]

My view is that there definitely does have to be a law defining marriage, or else there are no limits. Perhaps state level is the best place for such laws. Utah could have polygamy, some other state polyandry and sibling marriage, and California and Massachussetts could have homosexual and lesbian marriage. (I won't state my personal moral view at this time - we try to keep debate mild to avoid flame wars.) As a Libertarian-leaning Republican, I am wary of Federal mandates that preempt the States from solving their own issues.

[Camman]

well let me be the first to chime in since it seems to happen so often to threads I respond in....


Looks like a topic for KBJ, not here.

[primesuspect]

:thumbsup:

There is already an active topic about this (of course) over there. (http://www.keyboardjockey.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=214)

[primesuspect]

Please continue this discussion at Keyboardjockey.com (http://www.keyboardjockey.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=214)