Gay Marriage

"breaking news" yesterday re Bush's support for an amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman only.

"breaking news" ??????


Bush has destroyed our economy long term with an out-of-control deficit generated by tax cuts for the extremely wealthy who have not and will not re-invest, he has led us into a needless war of revenge and oil,and has spit in the face of diplomacy ruining our image overseas and clearly making us less safe from terrorism, he has ignored health care and pandered to the large corporate insurance vehicles who have joined other corporate lobbyists in filling his re-election coffers with two hundred million dollars, he has mocked and insultingly underfunded education reform, he has destroyed environmental safeguards, and he has lied most egregiously about promised jobs that will never come.


Yet he is so selfishly obsessed with getting re-elected and so obviously indifferent to the well-being of this country that he would use any means possible to achieve his egocentric agenda, including raising an issue on the backs of already targeted Americans, people who are discriminated against and struggling, people who just want what America is supposed to represent, freedom, family, etc. He is unabashedly using that difficult issue to polarize and divide our country, this from a "real American". Bush is no real American. He well knows that this issue, like abortion, will be divisive and will tear the country apart. And he well knows that the courts have not only the right but the obligation to stand up for the minority against the majority. He ran as a "uniter" not a "divider", yet he has done nothing but divide this country from day one, and now, his crowning moment, he is attempting to ride to re-election by stirring up fears and prejudices and hate, by hurting innocent people who have no one speaking for them in their own American government, and, of course, by hopefully diverting attention from the real issue which is the miserable detestable disgraceful failure that he is.



The pathetic, desperate media wouldn't know "breaking news" if they fell over it.

The administration certainly wasn't happy about Greenspan brining up the spectre of economic meltdown and Social Security cuts. Dubya is like a kid in a candy store, spending money that is not coming in. Spending money they suppose will be coming in. It's another Fantasyland government.

angie, Well stated: GWBush is a destroyer, not a peace-wonk. Why people can't see all the negatives of GWBush is beyond my comprehension. We're losing 77,000 jobs every month, and yet this dunce has the temerity to say he's going to 'create' 2.6 million jobs this year. His war on terrorism has created more terrorism for everybody across this globe. We've been on more red alerts during the past two years than the previous 100 years. When are the American People going to wake up?

I love the way this amendment proposal is being spun into a wedge intended move, ridiculous assumption.

Yeah, right.................... It's an obvious wedge move, something Bush is famous for -

It really isn't a "wedge," but a WMD.

hehehe....

A Wedge of Mass Digression?

... or Weapon of Mass Distraction?

Works both ways......

You'll note no one is questioning Kerry about the proposed amendment to the Mass Constitution that would define marriage as a pairing of one man and one woman only. One would think these people would be very interested in knowing where Kerry stands on it and why he is not already speaking out against it.

Kerry says it's okay for gays and lesbians to have a civil union, but not "marriage."

There has been so much said about "KIND, LOVING, SWEET, GOOD PARENTING, HONEST, CHURCH GOING, TENDER, WONDERFUL people who are bent on being a sexual partner with one of their own gender, that it is nauseating to HEAR anymore.

Where are these "couples" going to get 'children' to raise in their environment?? Are the 'girliecouples' going to supply eggs and wombs for the 'boycouples'?
For years, I have met people-- LOTS of people. Many of them 'gay' both male and female. The male gays who talked with me, most of them.... told me they were very turned 'off' by women, (sexually). Some of them even told me women STINK!! If someone tried to make them have sex with a 'woman' they would be sick!
Then I met ladies who were lesbian. (More of them than I knew guys). Most of them have little or 'pitiful' respect for the sexuality of beastly men. Some of them call them inconsiderate 'pigs'. Some I knew LEFT men, (in fact most did) and went into a lesbian relationship, because they could NOT find any gratification with a man. And of course, they blamed it on HIM.

I cannot see these groups "cooperating" to give each other 'children'.
The whole idea is so ludicrous, it is no wonder even a 'creeper' like Bush doesn't like the idea.

Many argue that it is discrimination to disallow them to marry. Why do they even WANT to?? It will be as much a LIE, as the he-shes that are exposed in the world today. Strutting in ladies wear, make-up and appearing female, but having a male sex organ. And is it NOT a lie....
to pretend to be what you are not???

Look no further than the nature in the world around us. No other animal in the earth makes it their usual habit, to have same- sex unions. There would be NO procreation without their pairing of male and female.

There was a minister having a conversation in my presence not so long ago. A woman was arguing with him that the young man she was assisting, though being gay, could not help it. She said to the evangelist, "Don't you believe the boy was born this way and could not help it?"
"Of course" the old preacher replied. "That's all in the Bible. Man is sure born in sin... all of us! But some of us have been redeemed!"

Where will homosexual couples find children? Adoption, in vitro fertilization, etc.... There are many more children needing adoption than there are parents to adopt them these days. Your arguements are weak, and I am quite honestly appalled by the narrow mindedness and bigotry of your comments. "He shes?"

Not only weak, but unreasonable. Many married couples with children divorce. Yes, divorce. That's the reality of this world. Many do not want their kids after they divorce. Yes, some single parents will keep their children, but the "sanictity" of marriage is now gone - kaput! There are also many drug addicted parents, and their children are not safe in that environment. These kids need somebody to love them. There are already children in loving homosexual homes. Over half of marriages between a man and a woman ends up in divorce - in this country. Crime against children are not limited to homosexuals. Welcome to the 'real' world.

fishin
Have you bumped into some particularly good commentary on this decision?

Unfortunately no. The original decision was 160+ pages and everything you read about it manages to get condensed into one line sound bites.

I've read through the whole thing 3 or 4 times now and it still doesn't make much sense. I'm not a lawyer by any means but I do have an interest in law and I've read a lot of court decisions and the decision the Mass SJC handed down on the original case here has to be the absolute worst I've ever read.

The news snap-shots on the case basically boil down to "Mass SJC rules gays have a right to marry" but the Mass SJC never said that in their original ruling. That issue was never even addressed.

Scrat: You are correct: Federalist 33 deals with the "neccessary and proper" clause, not the "general welfare" clause. A bit of sloppy editing on my part. Nevertheless, with that minor correction, I stand by my previous remarks.

Frankly, I can't see how you can. You were also wrong about #41, and seem to want to gloss over the central question of whether Hamilton and Madison wrote what I quoted and meant by it what I read those words to mean (what any understanding of written English leads one to conclude those words mean).

But there is no law against standing by one's remarks when those remarks are in error. Everyone has a right to be wrong, even willfully so. :wink: (Written in fun. Please don't go all postal on me!)

fishin

Yes, I'm hoping Dworkin will be engaged by the NYRB to address it.

As smart and carefully thoughtful as these judicial documents are, I'm a limited fellow and am greatly aided by a coach near at hand.