From CNN: WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush said Tuesday that he supports a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage to "prevent the meaning of marriage from being changed forever." Criticizing San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, judges of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, and county officials in New Mexico who moved to let same-sex couples receive marriage licenses, Bush said that in recent months "some activist judges and local officials have made an aggressive attempt to redefine marriage. "And unless action is taken, we can expect more arbitrary court decisions, more litigation, more defiance of the law by local officials, all of which adds to uncertainty. (Transcript of Bush comments) "After more than two centuries of American jurisprudence and millennia of human experience, a few judges and local authorities are presuming to change the most fundamental institution of civilization. Their actions have created confusion on an issue that requires clarity." Rest of article here... Okay, I know this is politics and such, but I just don't get it. First of all, what business is it of the federal government to do this? I don't know anyone who is in the situation to marry someone of the same sex, but seriously, who cares if Jack and Jim or Jane and Jill get married!? Could someone please tell me why letting 2 people of the same sex get married is so wrong!!?? I mean, yea, to me it's gross, but to each their own.
It's to preserve the 'Sanctity of marriage' or something, however as far as I'm concerned that's a religious affair and civil weddings should not be affected. Surely this is some kind of discrimination.. it's clearly homophobia on a massive scale.
This debate turned into a big flame war last time... http://forums.bit-tech.net/showthread.php?t=37147&page=1&pp=20
Good point... People, this isn't ment to be an issue of sexuality, this is a freedom of choice issue. In addition, this also calls into the front the Bill of Rights in-so-far as the Seperation of Church and State is concerned. The Patriot Act has taken away a TON of freedoms and liberties that we are used to, defining marrage within the US Constitution is another nail in the wall blocking us from total freedoms. The government is slowly chipping away at our rights under the guise of "terrorism" or "moral decency". Can't anyone else see this?
Nope. Not gonna move. I'm going to fight the best that I can - I don't want my kids to grow up with this crap. I said it a few months back and I'll say it again. Our govt is less "by the people and for the people" and more "by the corporation/special interest group, for the corporation/special interest group". The only way that we can fight back is to educate ourselves and our neighbors to what's really happening all around us. Damn, when did I turn into a political activist!? // OT BTW, what makes you the satellite king there Sam? OT //
OMG! (no pun-intended) Having read the other thread I cannot believe some of the pure discrimination in it. What marriage is to me - and I hope most people - is a declaration of love - further more of life long love, of fidelity, of faith (IN EACH OTHER!) and all the good stuff that goes with it. It's got nothing to do with gender, sexual acts or procreation. It has nothing to do with god. I find it hard to believe that some of the people around here - who seem intelligent enough - would believe that in our prejudiced societies that someone would choose to be a homosexual. Any homosexual *person* has no more choice over their sexuality than any heterosexual person - you are who you are and if you don't accept it - whatever your 'cross to bear' you're going to have a bloody hard life - sexual orientation isn't a choice to disgust you, your god, the pope, George W Bush or anyone else - nor is it anything to do with anyone else. It's like saying that the colour of your skin, your height or anything else about you could or should be changed. If this is the view of most - or even many - seemingly inteligent americans then I despair as the right-wing war-mongering despot is going to stay in for another term and bring more war and misery to the world. I hope his god does exist - I hope hell exists and I hope the b****** spends all of eternity burning in it.
What I dont get is 'Sanctity of marriage' part either.....If 'Sanctity of marriage' is the main issue then they should also ban "Joe the Obnoxious Millionaire Midget wanna be bride" from TV and put Britney Spears in jail for breaking the ''Sanctity of marriage'' rules. They might as well tell people they cant get married unless they have kids. This issue deals with to much personal intrest in Church inside the state. One of the issues at hand here is the fact that the gov. is deciding what is right and wrong for you and me, reguardless of what everyones prefrence is. They dont have the right to take anyones freedoms away because of there personal believe. This is from the other post and I just had to say somthing about it. "I also don't think it's acceptable to act as if homosexuality is normal. It's clearly abnormal. Gay people don't bother me, I mean they don't do me any harm, but I just think it's wrong and they shouldn't expect to be treated as a normal couple." Whats funny about this post is that history is full of homosexuality. Look at ancient Romans and Greece, you were expected to marry a women if you were a man but you were looked down on if you didnt have a gay lover. Kings had sex with men because it was beneith them to have sex with women. Now this isnt normal in todays sense as it was back then but then again we dont eat Cat and Dog here in the US as its is the norm in some parts of Asia. Being the "Norm" is what you make it. If being gay or having multypal wifes is normal for you then more power to you, as long as everyone is consenting adults then thats what matters. Im voting for Sharpton this time.....he just cracks me up
OT cos over heare most people get thee sky tv through sky digital so they only see the channels sky want I am saving up for a big digital motorised setup to acess ALL european tv and to go feedhunting(was quite a shock seeing fox tv coverign iraq on the tv downstairs and the europeans channels, even with my current analogue setup when ia hve to scurry up a ladder to change satellites, all teh europeans channels were showing the polar opposite of fox)
Now, since President Bush is doing this, I wonder how many of you are questioning your support for your leader. As far as I'm concerned, he isn't my President. He's supporting the destruction of free society as we used to know it. Bringing together Church and State is just the tip of the iceberg. Who knows what's next. Dad, don't you support Bush? And weren't you saying he's the best thing for this country? I'd re-evaluate that statement. (forgive me if I'm wrong, there's several Bush supporters on this forum).
I wasn't trying to support Bush or the current administration. I recall which thread you are talking about and I was just trying to make certain points. Honestly, I haven't liked any specific administration since I've been old enough to vote. To me, they are all different means to the same end which most of the time is me having less money and freedoms. I'm a little ticked off at the govt lately after doing my taxes. I got a sizable refund last year and this year, without any changes in salery or deductions, I have to pay. The only administration that I can fully support is one who actually has common sense. I've talked with my father about this and have come to the conclusion that if this country was a business, it would have folded long ago. What this country needs is LESS politics, less government waste, more investing in the private sector and research. We need to repeal NAFTA, dis-ban the WTO and create an atmosphere in which company's WANT to make their product in the US because it supports the American worker and is economically feasable.
Totally stupid homophobia IMO - what's the difference between a gay marriage and a hetero one in truth anyway? (please remove the picture if it's too rash - just a spot of jesting)
I definately disagree but isnt this a bad move for him? I'm still a high school student (I miss being able to vote by 1 year) so I haven't payed a ton of attention to this, but isn't his approval rating going down? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't further fueling this national debate be a bad thing for him? Historically, most presidents try to play all angles to get the most votes.
That's true, but after taking big hits over Iraq, he's trying to more actively pursue votes, polls show the majority of Americans are against gay marriage, so its an easy hit for him. In fact he's persuing it so strongly that he's even talking of alterting the consitution to block the right of same-sex couples to marry, which seems to me like a contradiction in terms.
Well, I do what I can. It's not much as I'm no where near a large city - well, NYC is 6hrs, but I have kids. My only real form of protesting is educating people and trying the best to only buy products made in the USA. Not to mention staying away from businesses who are part of corporations who belong to the WTO.
from what I've seen at BT (a largely British member population, or at least more from the UK than US) the British in general seem to be MUCH more open to the idea of same-sex marriage than those in the US. It came up in class today and someone just started bashing on homosexuals, and then the teacher got in on it, saying he felt that every time gays get married it degrades his marriage with is wife! what BS!!!! I got pissed and then people glared at me.... I live in Idaho, republican land, for those familar with the Western US. If this gets passed, I swear I am leaving this country.
