My response to Bush’s statement on same-sex Marriage
“Eight years ago, Congress passed, and President Clinton signed, the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage for purposes of federal law as the legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.”
Which was a big mistake when he did it, and we should have fought tooth and nail then.
“The act passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 342-67 and the Senate by a vote of 85-14.”
It shows how much our elected officials really care about equality for all Americans.
“Those congressional votes, and the passage of similar defense of marriage laws in 38 states, express an overwhelming consensus in our country for protecting the institution of marriage.”
As well as an overwhelming ignorance that prevails within our nation and the denial of human rights in favor of prejudice.
“In recent months, however, some activist judges and local officials have made an aggressive attempt to redefine marriage. In Massachusetts, four judges on the highest court have indicated they will order the issuance of marriage licenses to applicants of the same gender in May of this year.”
Finally, a step in the right direction. Tolerance, acceptance, equality. We do not seek to redefine marriage. We are seeking to be recognized as Americans, with all our rights intact and not hindered or reduced because of who we are.
“In San Francisco, city officials have issued thousands of marriage licenses to people of the same gender, contrary to the California Family Code. That code, which clearly defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman, was approved overwhelmingly by the voters of California.”
San Francisco has decided to take a stand against hatred, homophobia, legislated morality and truly support and uphold our nation’s most important value, freedom.
“A county in New Mexico has also issued marriage licenses to applicants of the same gender.”
Let freedom reign. Let love rule.
“And unless action is taken, we can expect more arbitrary court decisions, more litigation, more defiance of the law by local officials, all of which adds to uncertainty.”
These decisions are neither arbitrary, nor are they defiant of the basic American ideal of equal rights for all citizens. What is uncertain is why our government so actively seeks to limit our freedoms as well as invade our privacy, as well as escalate war against countries for no reason.
“After more than two centuries of American jurisprudence and millennia of human experience, a few judges and local authorities are presuming to change the most fundamental institution of civilization.”
After two centuries of prejudice and non-inclusive laws, and the millennia of human experience, which has had its share of genocide, slavery, calamity, destruction and death, not to mention your term in office, finally some brave souls are willing to take a stand for the true meaning of equality and justice, not to mention love.
“Their actions have created confusion on an issue that requires clarity. On a matter of such importance, the voice of the people must be heard. Activist courts have left the people with one recourse.”
Their actions have illuminated the dark, prejudiced side of American politics, and ‘outed’ the ignorance and hatred that exists in our nation.
“If we’re to prevent the meaning of marriage from being changed forever, our nation must enact a constitutional amendment to protect marriage in America.”
If we believe that opting to lift the ban on same sex marriage would change the meaning of marriage, then the constitution needs to be amended to protect the rights of Americans, not the institution of marriage. Marriage is safe, no matter what. Americans, under this administration, are not.
“Decisive and democratic action is needed because attempts to redefine marriage in a single state or city could have serious consequences throughout the country.”
The attempts to define who is truly deserving of equality in any state or city would have serious consequences throughout the country.
“The Constitution says that ‘full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts and records and judicial proceedings of every other state.”
“Those who want to change the meaning of marriage will claim that this provision requires all states and cities to recognize same-sex marriages performed anywhere in America.”
We don’t wish to change the meaning of marriage, but the meaning of what it is to be an American, with all the freedoms that are the right of all who live here.
“Congress attempted to address this problem in the Defense of Marriage Act by declaring that no state must accept another state’s definition of marriage. My administration will vigorously defend this act of Congress.”
Your administration would have all Americans limit their rights to freedom, equality, choice, privacy and the truth. Your administration has done nothing but put our children in jeopardy, fighting wars based upon lies you have told us, made the rest of the world hate us, skyrocketed unemployment, given unnecessary face time to the theocrats and recklessly driven us onto the road to ruin.
We must vigorously defend ourselves against your administration.
“Yet there is no assurance that the Defense of Marriage Act will not itself be struck down by activist courts. In that event, every state would be forced to recognize any relationship that judges in Boston or officials in San Francisco choose to call a marriage.”
If justice were to be served, if this were really the America we are to aspire to being, then the Defense of Marriage Act will be struck down. Every state should be forced to recognize that humanity cannot be judged by one code of ethics.
“Furthermore, even if the Defense of Marriage Act is upheld, the law does not protect marriage within any state or city.”
Furthermore, marriage needs no protection. Americans do. In every state and city.
“For all these reasons, the defense of marriage requires a constitutional amendment.”
For all these reasons, the defense of our country requires the Bush administration to end its reign of error.
“An amendment to the Constitution is never to be undertaken lightly.”
Nor shall it be used to buy more time in office.
“The amendment process has addressed many serious matters of national concern, and the preservation of marriage rises to this level of national importance.”
The preservation of freedom is far more important.
“The union of a man and woman is the most enduring human institution, honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith. Ages of experience have taught humanity that the commitment of a husband and wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society.”
Same sex marriage will promote the welfare of children, providing them with more two parent households, as well as promote the stability of society by expanding the range of what the American family is allowed to be.
“Marriage cannot be severed from its cultural, religious and natural roots without weakening the good influence of society.”
Marriage does not seek to be severed from its cultural, religious and natural roots. It seeks to be available to all Americans. Hatred and homophobia are the elements that weaken the good influence of society.
“Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all.”
Government, by recognizing and protecting Americans, serves the interests of all.
“Today, I call upon the Congress to promptly pass and to send to the states for ratification an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of a man and woman as husband and wife.”
Today, I call upon all Americans who love their freedom, to uphold the rights of others who are denied it.
“The amendment should fully protect marriage, while leaving the state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage.”
The amendment would leave Americans with an open door for the government to limit our freedom, equality and rights in everything outside of marriage.
“America’s a free society which limits the role of government in the lives of our citizens. This commitment of freedom, however, does not require the redefinition of one of our most basic social institutions.”
America’s freedom relies upon the ability of our elected officials to uphold it. This commitment of freedom, however, does not require the redefinition of freedom, our most basic social institution.
“Our government should respect every person and protect the institution of marriage. There is no contradiction between these responsibilities.”
Our government should respect every person and protect the institution of freedom. There is no contradiction between these responsibilities.
“We should also conduct this difficult debate in a matter worthy of our country, without bitterness or anger.”
“In all that lies ahead, let us match strong convictions with kindness and good will and decency.”
This is what I would have said too.
“Thank you very much.”
No thank you. Very much.