Rove: Bush Serious About Gay Marriage Ban
“WASHINGTON – President Bush (news – web sites) in his second term “absolutely” would push for a constitutional amendment that says marriage consists only of the union of a man and a woman, White House political adviser Karl Rove said.”
This is a huge mistake. Get out of our bedrooms and focus on the real issues that impact us. This is not one of them.
(Visited 80 times, 1 visits today)
Jack's Shack November 9, 2004 at 9:25 pm
I do what I can. 😉
Anonymous November 9, 2004 at 9:12 pm
Wow my first endorsement. Jack of the Shack likes my blog. I may just change its name to “The Bear” so that it all fits togather.
🙂
Stacey November 9, 2004 at 5:51 am
It’s not all gloom and doom. Don’t forget the landmark legislation in Massachusetts.
Sparky November 9, 2004 at 4:48 am
Before you all conclude that this isn’t likely to happen, keep in mind that 11 states, including relatively liberal Oregon, just approved amendments to their own constitutions that ban gay marriage. Every state that had the opportunity to vote on such an amendment passed it by overwhelming margins.
A number of the amendments go even further by limiting civil unions and other forms of legal arrangements in a way that not only affects the rights of gays but also of unmarried heterosexual couples.
There’s a movement afoot in this country inspired by the current Administration. Those of you who don’t think it likely, but who voted for him anyway, may be surprised at what happens in the next few years.
Jack's Shack November 8, 2004 at 10:56 pm
I do enjoy reading it.
DovBear November 8, 2004 at 10:27 pm
I should sue.
How are the legions of true-believers going to find me, if my marketing is inconsistant?
PS – Are you liking my blog?
Jack's Shack November 8, 2004 at 9:13 pm
Dov,
You are most certainly blogrolled, but you are not called DovBear. I changed it to The Bear. Twisting the brand a little bit.
DovBear November 8, 2004 at 8:46 pm
Jacky, why aren’t I on your blogroll?
As for your post, right on.
However, I think Rove, as usual, is talking from both sides of his faith. The pres may tamper with the constitution to define marriage, but his approval of civil unions is already on the record.
DB
Stacey November 8, 2004 at 6:04 pm
This is ridiculous, but I am not too worried about it. It already failed once.
I read a report of what came out of his planning session this weekend at Camp David and this issue wasn’t even mentioned. I read that domestically his focus is going to be on the economny and tax, medical liability and Social Security reform — which is where the focus should be — not the bedroom.