Bush Urges Congress to Pass Amendment Banning Same-Sex Marriage
 

Hmm, so after two years of saying tnohing much about since since the 2004 elections, this again becomes an issue, just in time to try to save the Republicans in the 2006 races...

Yeah, election year stunt.

Sadly for the Republicans, this time around "values issues" aren't going to be the big thing.

Yeah, I don't think even the fundies will get that much behind him, since he hasn't done anything about it in 2 years.

I don't understand what's wrong in stating that a child needs a father and a mother in order to have a normal life

I really want to know why the democrats can't make a values issue out of Iraq. It's simple: Our troops got sent off to die for his lies.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

Bush, unlike the democrats is willing to take a politically unpopular vision of the country, and stick with it. The democrats just pander to whatever they think people want to hear. It isn't that unpopular though. I think the 04 election, the homosexual card showed that perhaps as much as 50% of the country is on Bush's side concerning that. But he's just done so poorly on every issue, and not done much concerning that one, so maybe the fundies will take away his power for not pandering to them enough.

I mean, Harriet Myers anyone?

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


There's a big difference.

Bush has to try to sell his vision to the people.

The judges just overrule the popular vote. You say Bush's pushes unpopular positions

If the position is unpopular, why would it have passed democratically anywhere?

Originally posted by Datajack Franit
I don't understand what's wrong in stating that a child needs a father and a mother in order to have a normal life I agree. Having a Mother and Father is best.

But Gays need the support of something like heterosexual marriage for their relationships also.

Jon Miller

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


There's a big difference.

Bush has to try to sell his vision to the people.

The judges just overrule the popular vote. Yeah... those dirty judges. If not for them and their crazy judicial activism we could still have our White-only restaurants! http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...s/rolleyes.gif

The judiciary exists partially for that reason: to check the power of the democratically elected bits of the government so they can't use the will of the majority to oppress minorities.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
As opposed to those who have been overturning multitudes of bills passed democratically through state legislatures everywhere? If the framers meant for unrestricted government by the legislature, they could have said so, rather than going to the trouble constructing a government of limited powers and making the Constitution itself the supreme law, and creating the judiciary as a co-equal branch of government.

The most obscene act of public buggery to ever take place in this nation would be to amend the Constution for some assinine tripe like a quasi-definition of marriage. The 18th amendment is ridiculous enough, this would top it entirely.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


There's a big difference.

Bush has to try to sell his vision to the people.

The judges just overrule the popular vote. cite

Originally posted by Ecthy
Can amendments ever be removed from the constitution? You can pass another amendment to repeal a previous amendment. The 18th amendment banned alcohol, and the 21st amendment repealed the 18th amendment.

Originally posted by Datajack Franit
I don't understand what's wrong in stating that a child needs a father and a mother in order to have a normal life http://www.discussworldissues.com/im...ons/icon14.gif I for one fully support an amendment that would allow the department of children and family services to remove children from households with only one parent.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I think you greatly underestimate just how much contempt that the so-called fundies have of the Constitution. Fixed

I would guess that someone like MrFun might like a religious union.

Note that currently a purely religious union is allowed.

Now I don't tihnk that marriage is something we should make an ammendment about, and I don't think that gay marriage (or straight marriage) is currently inshrined in our constitution.

I am just in favor of it, as something voted in in our legislatures because I think it will assist gay people in leading a happy life.

JM

Originally posted by Ecthy
Can you make an amendment to repeal all amendments? http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...es/biggrin.gif

Can you make an amendment negating the entire constitution up to that one? Sure. At least, you can do that with our current set of amendments. It would be tricky if we ever passed an amendment that included a clause like "you're not allowed to pass another amendment that repeals this amendment."

I'm in no mood today for Bush and his social right-wing buddies. They can *all* go to hell as far as I'm concerned, and that's exactly where they're going to take this nation if its citizens — the so-called silent majority — don't get up off their damn asses and do something to keep the extremes (left or right) in check!

Furthermore, I will *never* support an effort to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban gay marriage. My God. I cannot believe the social right-wingers are trying this stunt. To actually amend the constitution so an identifiable group of human beings (gays and lesbians) is banned from partaking in something (marriage) the rest of us take for granted?!

The Republicans are the Party of Abraham Lincoln? Yeah, whatever. Not for the last 40 years or so.

Gatekeeper

Oh, Mr. 30% Approval Rate think that he's going to be able to rally the troops this go around. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...s/rolleyes.gif

Fundies with probably have seen that Bush has done jack for them so far and this is just talk and all rhetoric.

It only takes a simple majority of each legislative branch in each of the states. Given that frothing-at-the-mouth fundies are a more coherent voting block, it would be a lot more plausible for 38 states to ratify than for the 2/3 majorities in Congress. I don't think 38 states would go for it, but most likely more than 30 would.

Originally posted by BlackCat


http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...milies/lol.gif

That's pure BS unless, of course, you are claiming that gays are nonhumans. Well, if gays were human, we wouldn't be discriminating against them now, would we?

The Washington Post mentioned a real doozy of a radio ad in their article on this today. Apparently in NC there's a Democratic senator who favors civil unions and limited amnesty for immigrants (which includes allowing gay Mexicans to live with their longtime 'murican pardners). So, the GOP challenger apparently ran an ad with mariachi music playing in the background while a voiceover said something to the effect of, "Sen. Blahblah wants an America full of foreigners and homosexuals. Mr. Rightwing doesn't. Vote Rightwing."

A full day's supply of xenophobia in one tasty lump! http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...milies/lol.gif

EDIT: I got some facts wrong, as it turns out. It was actually a U.S. Representative seat, not Senate, in contest. Also, he actually said something like, "If [X] had his way, America would be nothing but one big fiesta for foreigners and homosexuals." Which is actually funnier.

Transparent pandering to shore up the conservative vote since his ratings are in the toilet (and because the President's ratings tend to rub off on his party mates in Congress). The question is will conservatives be stupid enough to fall for meaningless pandering yet again? Let's face it an intelligent person wouldn't have falling for the same stupid dog tricks this many years in a row but maybe the conservatives have finally stopped drinking the cool-aid and have gotten smart. Better 6 years late then never.

Originally posted by Ecthy
Can amendments ever be removed from the constitution? Yes, the constitution can be modified via the amendment process though it is very difficult to do so. It's only happened something like 26 times in the last 230 years and ten of those were right after the constitution was signed in order to add in a bill of rights.

Two of the biggest examples of changes to the constitution were the repeal of slavery and the repeal of prohibition.