Q Can you confirm that you're having a ceremony of some kind in the Rose Garden with regard to gay marriage?I'm still waiting for a plausible explanation as to what about heterosexual marriage needs protecting that doesn't invovlve biblical references by people who don't follow the bible in that great a detail.
MR. SNOW: I'm not going to give away any events that have not been announced on the public schedule...
...Q The President, two years ago when he announced his support for a constitutional amendment protecting marriage, there was a sense of urgency to his remarks that day -- I think it was March of 2004. He was talking about the need for decisive action in deciding judicial -- or judges, activist judges. Does he still sense -- share that sense of urgency? And what is he doing to try to win approval?
MR. SNOW: The President still believes it. And I will leave it to you just to keep your eyes and ears open in coming days to see what he'll be doing along those lines. Also, keep in mind, since the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts' initial verdict, a number of states have also enacted legislation that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. There's been considerable activity, the sense of urgency already being reflected in the acts of various states to tackle the issue themselves.
Thursday, June 01, 2006
What's Going On With The Mission to Embed Discrimination Into Our Beloved Constitution?
Found these two questions that recieved evasive answers in today's newswashing at Tony the Snow-job's press briefing. Does anyone know what's going on here?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
'It's not a hotdog unless it has mustard on it.'
No Constitutional Amendment will ever pass stating that 'Marriage is between a man and a woman.' What state would ratify defining a word as part of the Constitution? What next, a Constitutional Amendment to incorporate all of Webster word for word?
'Happiness is when you're oblivious to the stupidity around you.'
Post a Comment