Laura Bush - Pro gay marriage and pro choice

[thekarens]

Laura should have been president :)

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/05/watch-laura-bush-on-marriage-gay-couples-should-have-the-same-rights-as-everyone-else.html

Former First Lady Laura Bush discussed her views on same-sex marriage and abortion on Larry King last night. She said committed gay couples should have the same rights as everyone else and believes acceptance of it is a "generational thing." She also discussed her views on abortion, that she believes it should remain legal.

In late April I posted an excerpt from her new book, which said, "In 2004 the social question that animated the campaign was gay marriage. Before the election season had unfolded, I had talked to George about not making gay marriage a significant issue. We have, I reminded him, a number of close friends who are gay or whose children are gay. But at that moment I could never have imagined what path this issue would take and where it would lead.”

[myjohnson]

To bad the president don't make laws.

[ImaGuyGeek]

As I pointed out in the other thread, the opposition to gay marrige wasn't Bush, it was Bill Clinton.

Defense of Marriage Act is the short title of a federal law of the United States passed on September 21, 1996 as Public Law No. 104-199, 110 Stat. 2419. Its provisions are codified at 1 U.S.C. § 7 and 28 U.S.C. § 1738C. The law, also known as DOMA, has two effects:

1. No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) needs to treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state.
2. The federal government defines marriage as a legal union exclusively between one man and one woman.

The bill was passed by Congress by a vote of 85-14 in the Senate[1] and a vote of 342-67 in the House of Representatives,[2] and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996.

[stevenallenbarnard]

As I pointed out in the other thread, the opposition to gay marrige wasn't Bush, it was Bill Clinton.

Defense of Marriage Act is the short title of a federal law of the United States passed on September 21, 1996 as Public Law No. 104-199, 110 Stat. 2419. Its provisions are codified at 1 U.S.C. § 7 and 28 U.S.C. § 1738C. The law, also known as DOMA, has two effects:

1. No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) needs to treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state.
2. The federal government defines marriage as a legal union exclusively between one man and one woman.

The bill was passed by Congress by a vote of 85-14 in the Senate[1] and a vote of 342-67 in the House of Representatives,[2] and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996.

Laws get repealed all the time. I seem to remember something about black people and women not being allowed to vote. Me personally, I'm all for abolishing marriage as an official institution. Let's only allow people to have LEGAL domestic partnerships, and if you have a church that is willing to marry you, then that is between you and them. That way churches can choose who they wish to allow to be married and the rest of us can get on with our lives

[marauder_77868]

So..as a government and a society we should aspire to the lowest common denominator? That would be like, using your example, abolishing voting rather than allowing blacks and women to vote.

[Nickintex]

Did gay marriage kill the dinosaurs?

[marauder_77868]

Did gay marriage kill the dinosaurs?

No, but waiting for homosexual males to give birth might be a pretty good path to extinction...lol

[ImaGuyGeek]

No, but waiting for homosexual males to give birth might be a pretty good path to extinction...lol

Off topic but I can't help myself...

We always have the Single Cell Organisms to macro-evolve back into dinosaurs. :)

[eklikewhoa]

I just threw up my purple kool-aid!

Hahahahaa

[Darbex]

I didnt read her statements but what you posted doesnt say she believes in gay marriage just that they should have rights. I have plenty of gay friends and one is probably the closest thing to being a dad to me. But my question on whether gay marriage should be permitted by states is this where would you draw the line. Why cant someone then come in and make the arguement that we should allow the marriage of multiple people as its discrimination to allow to men to be married and not allow two men and a woman to be married. Or what if someone comes in and says I want to marry my sister why not isnt that discrimination? Or what if someone wants to marry their pet dog? You can keep extrapolating this out for any number of different scenarios so why shouldnt they all be allowed to marry?

[Gene D]

I would have voted against her soley on the statements attributed to her above

[Darbex]

I think we should just legalize civil unions in all states and be done. Why is it absolutely necessary to claim marriage? If the whole arguement is its not that big of a deal just let them get married then my point is if its not that big of a deal then ignore it and go for laws that give gay couples more similar rights under the law as married people have. As an example let them file jointly to the IRS and you will find out that its not that beneficial in most cases. Let them adopt, although I am not 100% that this is the best environment (most studies dont have a long enough span to give an adequate interpretation of the data) I will say that it is 100% better then the way a lot of kids are being raised now days in traditional or single-parent homes so it can't hurt.

[Darbex]

I always thought that pro-gay marriage proponents were wasting their time fighting the wrong battle and could have had a quicker more meaningful win by pushing civil union agendas. In turn most proponents have infuriated the christian right and recently have annoyed many centrists who didnt care before but as its getting pushed down their throats more and more dont even want to help the overall agenda of equality.