Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Statement by the President on Marriage (MUST READ -- Dean/Kerry/Clark Statements Follow)
The White House ^ | Nov 18, 2003 | President Bush

Posted on 11/18/2003 3:02:45 PM PST by PhiKapMom

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-310 next last
To: PhiKapMom
After reading the several responses above from Dean, Kerry, Kennedy, Lieberman, et. al., I am struck by the fact that the Left suddenly believes in states rights! What a bunch of flaming hypocrites.
51 posted on 11/18/2003 3:42:24 PM PST by Wolfstar (An angel still rides in the whirlwind and directs this storm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
That's nice. Now he should stop taking donations from the Log Cabin Republicans.
52 posted on 11/18/2003 3:42:48 PM PST by deannadurbin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pollywog
I hope the Demo candidates carress and applaud the Minn. Supremes!!

Just for the record, it was Massachusetts. I am sure that's what you meant, but yes, you have the right idea.

Give them enough rope to hang themselves.

53 posted on 11/18/2003 3:43:00 PM PST by Semper911 (For some people, bread and circus are not enough. Hence, FreeRepublic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ArGee
How come states have the right to decide this issue, but they don't have the right to enact laws when it comes to sexual behavior? Democrats hailed the SCOTUS Texas decision yet they are using the "states rights" argument here? Not that I support laws that regulate sexual behavior between consenting adults, just seems like a pretty huge cop-out on the part of Democrats to say this.
54 posted on 11/18/2003 3:43:22 PM PST by ShandaLear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Marriage can only be between a man and a woman ~ Period!
55 posted on 11/18/2003 3:44:44 PM PST by blackie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mhking
"It's wrong for any state to discriminate against gays and lesbians by denying them the many benefits and protections that the laws of the state provide for married couples," Kennedy said.

Why is he using that word: "wrong"? What does Kennedy know about "right" and "wrong"? How can he say something's wrong if not the blasphemy of gay "marriage"?

56 posted on 11/18/2003 3:45:17 PM PST by Theo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Clark has no clue. It will not be up to each state. If mass adopts homosexual marriage, full faith and credit will force it to be recognized in each state. ONLY the federal marriage amendment will prevent this.

(does this mean that Mass. now has to recognize Moslem marriages with up to four wives?)
57 posted on 11/18/2003 3:45:25 PM PST by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
It is the traditional family that is the basis for our entire culture and society

You are correct-it is the basis for our entire culture and society. Now, down to business:

Traditional marriage has 3 elements:

1) It is permanent (no divorce)

2) It is sexually exclusive (adultery is a felony)

3) It is between a man and at least one woman.

Which of these does your amendment restore?

58 posted on 11/18/2003 3:45:31 PM PST by Jim Noble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
I cannot feature anyone voting for Dean that is the least bit conservative but I can sure see every last person that leans conservative (even a little) voting against him and for President Bush.
59 posted on 11/18/2003 3:47:27 PM PST by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- Don't forget to Visit/donate at http://www.georgewbush.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ShandaLear
just seems like a pretty huge cop-out on the part of Democrats to say this.

The DemoCOPOUT party?

Works for me.

Shalom.

60 posted on 11/18/2003 3:47:33 PM PST by ArGee (Would human clones work better than computers? Both would be man-made.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: TrappedInLiberalHell
Liberals hate, then accuse others of hating. I think we need to tell all these angry liberals about prozac.
61 posted on 11/18/2003 3:48:09 PM PST by TaxRelief (Welcome to the only website dedicated to the preservation of a free republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: kingu
This decision is a great example of the judicary imposing their beliefs on the American people. We, as conservatives, must fight the liberals tooth and nail. We have to stop this erosion of basic American values.
62 posted on 11/18/2003 3:49:08 PM PST by Indy Pendance (Don't sweat the petty . . . pet the sweaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: azcap
Couldn't agree with you more! This is not only a winning issue for Republicans but Republicans are on the right side of this issue IMHO. Republicans at all levels need to get behind the Marriage Amendment and do it NOW!
63 posted on 11/18/2003 3:49:55 PM PST by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- Don't forget to Visit/donate at http://www.georgewbush.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: maica
For a group who say that the government has no business in their bedroom, they are demanding the government's blessing on their bedroom behavior.

Government involvement in licensing marriage, and related matters such as inheritance and rights to make medical decisions, is the problem. In my view, the best way to deal with this is to return marriage and related matters entirely to the private sector. Otherwise, if the gays win on the same-sex marraige issue, there would be no legal foundation on which to bar polygamy, adult-child relationships, and the like.

64 posted on 11/18/2003 3:50:08 PM PST by Wolfstar (An angel still rides in the whirlwind and directs this storm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Thank you, PKM!

How refreshing... living from Canada, I am getting pretty tired of... oh well, you know.

Thanks for the post!
65 posted on 11/18/2003 3:50:13 PM PST by proud American in Canada ("We are a peaceful people. Yet we are not a fragile people.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
""As Governor of Vermont, I was proud to sign the nation's first law establishing civil unions for same-sex couples"

Oh boy... we all knew that.

And that's the reason Howard Dean will never be elected Pres.
66 posted on 11/18/2003 3:51:07 PM PST by proud American in Canada ("We are a peaceful people. Yet we are not a fragile people.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
If the Massachusetts legislature decides to legalize same-sex marriages, it will be up to each state to decide whether those marriages will be valid in their state-- and that is a choice each state, not the courts, will have to make.

Yup. They'll leave it up to each state, just like Roe vs Wade.

Becki

67 posted on 11/18/2003 3:51:23 PM PST by Becki (Pray continually for our leaders and our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: woodyinscc
I think that President Bush just got on the horse and is starting a ride that will be as famous as Paul Revere's.

Actually Lieberman's comment is somewhat similiar to Kerry's.

Make one wonder what Weaselely Clark will say if he can remember to say it or what he said when he did say it.
68 posted on 11/18/2003 3:51:42 PM PST by Grampa Dave (George Soros, the Evil Daddy Warbucks, has owned the DemonicRats for decades!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
3) It is between a man and at least one woman

You've included that as an element of traditional marriage a couple of times. I don't understand the "at least" part. Perhaps you're playing loose with ther term "traditional marriage" to include what's practiced in some cultures not influenced by Christianity?

69 posted on 11/18/2003 3:52:07 PM PST by Theo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: proud American in Canada
Oh c'mon... That's just ONE of the reasons why Howard Dean will never be elected President... Let's be honest with ourselves...

;-)
70 posted on 11/18/2003 3:52:14 PM PST by nuffsenuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
I think the Constitutional amendment is needed for the reasons you have stated -- it is the traditional family that is the basis for our entire culture and society
71 posted on 11/18/2003 3:52:28 PM PST by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- Don't forget to Visit/donate at http://www.georgewbush.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
What a bunch of flaming hypocrites

These people will now get married in Mass., move to another State, then sue for the rights accorded them in Mass. These libs are relentless, in their rush to destroy all the history, mores and traditions, that made this Country great. They will not be satisfied until they assume full and absolute control. After all, they know what is good for everyone.

72 posted on 11/18/2003 3:53:23 PM PST by woodyinscc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: sonsofliberty2000
Actually it is a spin of their two faced statement: I oppose the Iraqi war but I support our service men/women!
73 posted on 11/18/2003 3:54:01 PM PST by Grampa Dave (George Soros, the Evil Daddy Warbucks, has owned the DemonicRats for decades!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
The Judges are our new "philosopher kings" as described in Plato's works. A constitutional repupublic is no longer necessary with these elites governing our every move.

By the way, see below. Plato besides advocating an utopia based on rule by philosopher kings also had definite views on sexuality and other matters.

"Plato was born in Athens, Greece in 469 B.C. He was the student of Socrates. Plato founded a school that might be one of the world's first universities. The school was on the land of a prominent Greek known as Academus. This is where the term "academy" came from. Plato wrote about dialectic and Socrates' philosophy that encouraged people to examine their way of thinking and explore their ideas. Plato's works consist of a series of dialogues and discussions.

"While many men in Greek society practiced bisexuality by taking both a wife and a male lover, Plato is notable because he advanced the belief that some men are inherently homosexual, just as some men are inherently heterosexual. Plato believed that love between two men is superior to that between a man and a woman. Plato called this love "uranian" love and suggested this love was ruled by a different aspect of the goddess Aphrodite. At a time when male homosexual love was unequal between an older man and his student, Plato advocated for these relationships to become equal and based on reciprocity. Also, in contrast to Greek custom, he believed that these relationships should be life-long. To Plato, love is more than just the physical act, and the goal of love is the moral and intellectual improvement of the younger partner with the help of the older one. This is has come to be known as "platonic" love. Over time the term has become distanced from its roots, and is used to describe non-sexual love and friendship.

"In his Symposium, Plato suggests that mankind was originally made up of complete beings. Mankind originally had three genders that were a fusion of two human bodies. Some were male-male, some were female-female, and some were male-female. These beings were round, had two faces, had four arms, and reproduced asexually. These beings were complete, incredibly happy, and even arrogant. This angered the gods who were incredibly jealous. The gods split these beings in half, which is the present state of mankind. We all search for our other half in hopes of becoming whole again.

"In The Republic, Plato advances the idea of an army of male lovers that becomes the model for the Sacred Band of Thebes. He believed that an army of lovers would be stronger than an even an army made up of a family or tribe. Soldiers would have a vested interest in protecting their lovers, and in fighting so as not to lose face in the presences of their beloved.

So there you have it. In 2500 years we have come full circle. Perhaps the judges will now rule "tell, don't ask" as the norm for both the military and life.

74 posted on 11/18/2003 3:54:46 PM PST by shrinkermd (i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
This decision is a great example of the judicary imposing their beliefs on the American people

Fred Barnes just about exploded when discussing that this major issue was decided by a 4-3 decision in the Mass Supreme Court - not even a unamimous decision.

75 posted on 11/18/2003 3:54:59 PM PST by maica (Leadership matters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
Hey, that's a nice can of worms you have there. Do you need to borrow this?


76 posted on 11/18/2003 3:55:33 PM PST by William McKinley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
I am struck by the fact that the Left suddenly believes in states rights!


77 posted on 11/18/2003 3:55:52 PM PST by prairiebreeze (My dad, a WWII veteran always said that America's best ally was...Britain. He was right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Oh throw up. "equality" propanda again.
78 posted on 11/18/2003 3:56:00 PM PST by Libertina ("We're not establishing intimacy with these people, we want to crush them." Rush on rats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Gov. Mitt Romney (R) of Massachusetts basically stepped up to the microphones today and said the same thing as Bush.

79 posted on 11/18/2003 3:56:09 PM PST by SamAdams76 (198.4 (-101.6))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libertina
make that propaganda... I was busy being sick.
80 posted on 11/18/2003 3:56:31 PM PST by Libertina ("We're not establishing intimacy with these people, we want to crush them." Rush on rats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
You don't like one or more of those elements, I take it?
81 posted on 11/18/2003 3:58:48 PM PST by B Knotts (Go 'Nucks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: jde1953
The religion issue is irrelevant. Priests are generally notary pulblics who execute the marriage license. No government agency recognizes a "religious" ceremony.

The institution of marriage is the model we use to raise children. If government is removed from marriage, then government must be removed from all issues of all forms of property since marriage follows inheritances and property interests.

If you follow Dean's statement. You "observations" are exactly in line with is view point. The democrats would like nothing more than to make no marriage recognized ONLY civil unions are recognized under the law.

Homosexuals have no special right to marry. They can execute the same legal documents an unmarried couple can choose to do. This whole judgement is based on the flawed notion that marriage is just about love.
82 posted on 11/18/2003 3:59:31 PM PST by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: TrappedInLiberalHell
...would it be better for them to enter into exclusivity bonds like this, rather than continue a promiscuous lifestyle...

Marriage has never stopped anyone who wanted lead a promiscuous lifestyle from doing so, and it never will. To assume that because gays would have access to government-sanctioned marriage some would not also be promiscuous is to fail to understand human nature.

This entirely manufactured issue of "gay marriage" is not about civil rights, nor about helping people avoid promiscuity. It is just another front in the Left's roughly 150-year-old assault on traditional social mores, and further their mission to increase the scope and reach of big government.

83 posted on 11/18/2003 3:59:43 PM PST by Wolfstar (An angel still rides in the whirlwind and directs this storm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
I said it will probably be reversed by passage of the proposed US Constition amendment to define marriage as a union of "one man and one woman." Further, I said that President Bush will support this amendment, and all the Democrat candidates will be forced to oppose it, with the result of putting the Democrat nominee -- whoever it is -- further behind the political eight-ball.

This is exactly what I thought when I heard this had passed.This is now going to sharply divide the democrats that have a conscience, and I am sure many will have to make some hard decisions!!!!!

84 posted on 11/18/2003 4:01:48 PM PST by pollywog (Psalm 121;1 I Lift mine eyes to the hills from whence cometh my help.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
Government involvement in licensing marriage, and related matters such as inheritance and rights to make medical decisions, is the problem. In my view, the best way to deal with this is to return marriage and related matters entirely to the private sector.

I do not understand what you mean about "the private sector.' Laws regarding property are explicitly a government function. Property ownership and its orderly transfer are a large measure of the foundation of a successful society.

Otherwise, if the gays win on the same-sex marraige issue, there would be no legal foundation on which to bar polygamy, adult-child relationships, and the like.

This is one of the reasons that the Supreme Court decision about the prime 'right' being the 'right of privacy' is a wrong decision.

85 posted on 11/18/2003 4:02:14 PM PST by maica (Leadership matters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
'Thought you might appreciate these.

Homosexuality: An Attempt at Clarity

Why Judaism Rejected Homosexuality

86 posted on 11/18/2003 4:03:27 PM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman. Today's decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court violates this important principle. I will work with congressional leaders and others to do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage.

Maybe, just maybe, it's not the end of days after all.
87 posted on 11/18/2003 4:03:45 PM PST by polemikos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ
Thank you, Mr. Governor. I voted for this man

So did I, and I'm glad to see him come out against the ruling

I am not from your state but I am going to write him and thank him for his stand, as a citizen of the USA. We are going to have to let the elected officals KNOW how we feel. They need all the support they can get. I am glad YOUR Governor stood his ground.

I am not sure WHERE our new Gov. Arnold stands...he would probably let it pass, unfortunately.

88 posted on 11/18/2003 4:05:19 PM PST by pollywog (Psalm 121;1 I Lift mine eyes to the hills from whence cometh my help.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Wolfstar
infidelity was legalized with no-fault marriage. With rare exception, infidelity is not even relevant/admissible in divorce court.
89 posted on 11/18/2003 4:05:38 PM PST by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
I am still going ahead with my plans to build an Ark to be on the safe side. I just sent my wife out to gather up the animals, and I am going to Home Depot to get the lumber and nails.
90 posted on 11/18/2003 4:05:44 PM PST by RobertP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maica; JohnnyZ; Pubbie; Kuksool; Dan from Michigan; Coop; Clintonfatigued; fieldmarshaldj
"Fred Barnes just about exploded when discussing that this major issue was decided by a 4-3 decision in the Mass Supreme Court"


Does anyone know how many of the 4 pro-gay-marriage Mass. judges were nominated by RINO governors Weld, Cellucci or Swift? Let's hope Arnold doesn't follow suit and nominate "progressive" judges to the California Supreme Court.
91 posted on 11/18/2003 4:06:30 PM PST by AuH2ORepublican (Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
'The religion issue is irrelevant. Priests are generally notary pulblics who execute the marriage license. No government agency recognizes a "religious" ceremony.'

My feelings precisely. So why have I heard so many people, during the debates over same-sex marriage, claim that marriage is a religious institution? Why does Pres. Bush refer to it as "sacred," wishing to preserve its "sanctity," if this is not in the religious sense?

In any case, only the *civil* part of marriage is recognized under the law as things stand now; the law doesn't care which supernatural entity you have called upon to bless the civil contract, and, as you correctly point out, the religious part alone doesn't qualify.

I think we are more in agreement than disagreement here.
92 posted on 11/18/2003 4:07:53 PM PST by jde1953
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest
God will ultimately HAVE the FINAL WORD , Yosemitest!! Oh that men would realize this and repent of their wickedness. Who would have believed years ago we would be even VOTING on such a issue. God Help us.
93 posted on 11/18/2003 4:09:00 PM PST by pollywog (Psalm 121;1 I Lift mine eyes to the hills from whence cometh my help.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: William McKinley
Seriously, how would the courts intervine? What decisions could they rule upon, what precidents can they cite? This decision is, and my example is, just the tip of the iceburg. Don't you get the feeling this is just another nail in the coffin of our constitution?
94 posted on 11/18/2003 4:09:15 PM PST by Indy Pendance (Don't sweat the petty . . . pet the sweaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
Homosexuals have no special right to marry.

Does anybody have a right to marry? Wouldn't requiring a license obviate a right?

Shalom.

95 posted on 11/18/2003 4:13:25 PM PST by ArGee (Would human clones work better than computers? Both would be man-made.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Semper911
Yes, I did mean Mass!....I had just sent a email to someone in Minn and had " Minn" on the brain!! LOL! I stand corrected.
96 posted on 11/18/2003 4:13:51 PM PST by pollywog (Psalm 121;1 I Lift mine eyes to the hills from whence cometh my help.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Indy Pendance
I see it the other way. I see it as a case of a side which has been trying to boil a frog by slowly increasing the gas turning the knob too audaciously, and the critter is about to jump out of their pot.

But, if the precedent of judges being able to dictate from the bench what legistlatures cannot or will not is allowed to stand forever, then you are right. But I don't think that trend will be allowed to stand. It required people not noticing that we have a tryanny of the judiciary, but rulings like this are waking people up.

Or at least, that is the sense of my optimistic eyes.

I can see it now, a court ruling that the first amendment's edict that Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion does not mean that churches can 'discriminate' against gay church members. Can't you?

97 posted on 11/18/2003 4:14:46 PM PST by William McKinley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
BUMP!!

Praise the LORD for this President!

98 posted on 11/18/2003 4:14:47 PM PST by ohioWfan (Have you prayed for your President today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
sorry, but I don't understand the phrase "sanctity of marriage" when a couple such as Liza Minelli and David Gest will still be able to marry!
99 posted on 11/18/2003 4:15:16 PM PST by armadale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
"I will work with congressional leaders and others to do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage."

I thank God that we have him as our President.

100 posted on 11/18/2003 4:15:19 PM PST by Spunky (This little tag just keeps following me where ever I go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-310 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson