[ravingnutter]

Bush, by NOT supporting it, is in effect, SUPPORTING civil unions

That is so laughable...kind of like "lack of proof is proof of a conspiracy". Licenses for any union are issued by the STATE...therefore it is a STATE issue, however the FedGov does not recognize them under the DOMA. Bush said if the states stepped on the toes of the FedGov, he would step in and pass a consitutional amendment. So...if he would step in, then logically one must assume he supports an amendment, but he is just not sure if that will be necessary yet, as there are court cases still pending on the matter.

[churchillbuff]

Bush certainly spoke confusingly enough that his sycophants on FR are able to explain away his statement (at least to their satisfaction, not mine) - - the bottom line is clear enough, no matter how fractured the president's syntax: he won't support an amendment banning civil unions.

[Orangedog]

Amending the Constitution is not neccesary. Congress has the power to pass a laws and keep the Judicial branch from monkeying with them if that restriction is written into the legislation. THAT is the real nuclear option. Passing an amendment just gives the judiciary another provision that they can rule means anything they say it means.