Obama, Cheney, Bush and Powell in New Pro Gay Marriage Ad

reply to post by JohnPhoenix

That's so true!

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
about Ms. Bush withdrawing - I'm sure she has her reasons -

In the past, the Bush women have said that abortion shouldn't be in politics. It's a medical issue. So I'm wondering if perhaps she feels the same way about marriage equality. That it's up to the medical community to determine that it's fine and then the states will come through. In the past, the medical folks (psychology and MDs) have said that homosexuality wasn't normal. Maybe she's pushed it off onto them?????

I don't know .. that's just one guess of many ... but I'm just brainstorming based on what both Barbara Bush and Laura Bush have said about abortion.

Originally posted by hadriana
The law should not favor any one religion.

In my utopia the law would be completely secular ... respecting people's rights to believe and worship as they wish but not imposing any religious beliefs on anyone. But sadly .. that's probably not something this planet will ever really see ...

The fact that they support same constitutional rights and benefits doesnt really mean they support gay marriage.

Also both laura bush and cheney's comments dont really relate to gay marriage at all... specially Cheney's. It seems like that comment was taken out of a press conference about Iraq.

Thats a really really low and disgusting move to quote them on gay marriage using parts of interviews that CAN BE seen like that but actually aren't.

I mean seriously... Laura Bush supporting gay marriage? Really? Shes pretty conservative and a real Lady / Woman / Wife ... not really the kind of what our society is building right now.

Stop using people to promote your agenda, specially the ones who are not supporting the said agenda. Specially respect Laura Bush.

reply to post by seabag

What wrong with “separate but equal”?

Because separate is never equal...

Just study US history....

The term is an oxymoron anyway. A group can't be equal if they are segregated by law.

Originally posted by kosmicjack
but now Laura Bush wants her clip in tbe commercial removed.

What a bitch.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Marriage is more of a religious issue to me anyway, and always has been, with its core concepts coming from books like the Bible- and perhaps before that in ancient community.

I don’t understand why we can’t have civil unions with ALL of the so-called “perks” of marriage from a legal standpoint without the title “marriage”? The “marriage” part is what’s dividing everyone and creating the rift IMO.

Because religious gay people exist and want to take part in their religion.

How hard is that to comprehend?

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Gross!

reply to post by FraternitasSaturni

Originally posted by FraternitasSaturni
Also both laura bush and cheney's comments dont really relate to gay marriage at all... specially Cheney's. It seems like that comment was taken out of a press conference about Iraq.

What are you talking about?

Quote from Cheney (not about Iraq):

“Lynne and I have a gay daughter, so it’s an issue our family is very familiar with,” Cheney told an audience that included his daughter. “With the respect to the question of relationships, my general view is freedom means freedom for everyone."

Dick Cheney on Civil Rights

Cheney believes it's a states' issue.

And Laura Bush's full statement:

“I think there are a lot of people who have trouble coming to terms because they see marriage as traditionally between a man and a woman, but I also know when couples are committed to each other and love each other, they ought to have, I think, the same sort of rights that everyone has.”

Update: Bush will be Removed from Ad

Update: The Respect for Marriage Coalition will remove the ads featuring Laura Bush starting this weekend and replace them with the ad below featuring a Republican military veteran.

Do they have to honor her request, I wonder...

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


At first I was going to say yes, if she didn't authorize the use of the video clip. Than again, since it was a video recorded interview which has already been released to the public, televised nationally and archived, I would think she wouldn't have any rights to pull it. It's like a public archived video clip being used in a political ad.

But than again, she's a political elite having been the wife of a former president. People of power and money don't live by the same rules as the rest of us. We've seen it played out many times before.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


the bible is not the be all and end all. in my opinion, it lost allot of integrity when it was translated from hebrew and greek into english, leaving many things open to interpretation.

point is simple, people should be allowed to choose their own sexual orientation. ive seen some ridiculous americans who have married/tried to marry various inanimate objects. thats a bit extreme.

www.decodedstuff.com...

if someone has already dug this up, i do apologize. but if 2 people love each other, they should be allowed to marry regardless of their orientation. its got nothing to do with you or me, its about how 2 people feel about each other.

glad to see the US catching up on the gay marriage issue.

on another note, I hav a lesbian friend who tried her best to be straight for her parents sake, but realized she simply did not have an attraction to men and i dont blame her, as I am fond of women also. gay men and women should have equal rights. they are people and until yone of your friends "comes out" you may not realize this. if you push that friend away for being what they are, then you my friend are a douchebag. being gay is not evil. and for some it isnt a choice

Gays should be allowed to marry.

Why should they be spared the misery that married heterosexual couples have to endure. It's just not fair I tell ya!

reply to post by yadda333

Because religious gay people exist and want to take part in their religion.

How hard is that to comprehend?

Excuse me? Gay marriage is frowned upon by most Christians (still the predominant religion in America).

How hard is that to comprehend?

Do you think all the stink over this issue is because of simple political differences or because of the Christian view of marriage being between one man and one woman? Get real!

reply to post by FlyersFan


I never understood how Christians thought making something illegal like gay marriage is the best way to keep from being gay. It makes no sense as if some guy walking down the street one day just said 'hey I think I'm gonna F that dude.' BS it pre-meditated sex so to speak. Do the pious feel better judging all those around them? Like if it was possible to change to being straight the illegality of it is going to make people not gay? I don't understand their train of thought

reply to post by WaterBottle

Because separate is never equal...

Just study US history....

The term is an oxymoron anyway. A group can't be equal if they are segregated by law.

I can’t change history and you’ve presented no examples.

Why can’t we make it separate but equal? Why can’t we go on about our lives and keep both sides happy? Call it something else (civil union, civil pact, life partner, etc) and collect your benefits…what’s so hard?

The reason people won't agree to call it something else so we can get past this is because progressives just won't be happy until they tear down every last foundation of our society IMO. Everyone has got to bend over (pun intended) and accommodate their every last whim. A lot of us are fed up with it.

Call it something else...let's move on. The country is imploding and we have more important things to worry about.

Originally posted by seabag
The reason people won't agree to call it something else so we can get past this is because progressives just won't be happy until they tear down every last foundation of our society IMO.

What you see as a tearing down of the foundation, I see as an expansion of that foundation. Unless you can prove that allowing same-sex marriage somehow harms your "marriage", then your assertion is false. Are you afraid your wife may leave you for another woman; or perhaps you may leave her for another man if same-sex marriage were to be legalized nationally? What is it exactly that would tear apart the foundation of your marriage?

reply to post by LeatherNLace

What you see as a tearing down of the foundation, I see as an expansion of that foundation. Unless you can prove that allowing same-sex marriage somehow harms your "marriage", then your assertion is false.

It doesn’t harm my marriage, it harms the sanctity of marriage.

Genesis 2:24 - Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Matthew 19:4-6 - He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

I don’t see how marriage can be interpreted any other way. Why don’t you answer my question? Why can’t we call it something else, give this new union the same benefits under the law and move on????

Are you afraid your wife may leave you for another woman; or perhaps you may leave her for another man if same-sex marriage were to be legalized nationally? What is it exactly that would tear apart the foundation of your marriage?

Not hardly!

Nice fallacious argument though.

reply to post by Headband7

I never understood how Christians thought making something illegal like gay marriage is the best way to keep from being gay.

Christians don’t make law…the US Congress does!

Just sayin’

Times move on. Society changes. You wouldn't say to your black neighbor, "Get me a sammich." See? Times change. Some need to be dragged kicking and screaming though. Even Archie Bunker got it after 9 seasons.

BTW, I always thought Laura was fairly hot. Mind she doesn't have me by 16 years.

reply to post by davjan4


Marriage has been an exchange of property since the beginning. That's why there was a dowry. That's why the father of the bride "gives her away." In biblical times, marriage often included several -- or even hundreds -- of wives. It is only in the last 85 years that a woman is able to maintain any social status at all absent a husband. In the modern word, marriage is as disposable as a plastic water bottle. It is entered into on a whim, and dissolved even faster. Not just by celebritards, but by political and religious leaders, ceo's and the nice straight white couple down the street. Clearly -- "traditional marriage" is something we can and should modify until its benefits apply to everyone.