We have something to say about, well, everything. Mostly, we annotate the President's speeches with our comments. Enjoy. Please write us.

Monday, June 05, 2006

Gay Marriage - The President Bush Address

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Next week, the United States Senate will begin debate on a constitutional amendment that defines marriage in the United States as the union of a man and woman.

Reo: Or in most states, a man and a child.

On Monday, I will meet with a coalition of community leaders, constitutional scholars, family and civic organizations, and religious leaders. They're Republicans, Democrats, and independents who've come together to support this amendment. Today, I want to explain why I support the Marriage Protection Amendment, and why I'm urging Congress to pass it and send it to the states for ratification.

Peo: Because I tried to energize the voters with immigration and it backfired.
Reo: And this issue worked in 2004!
Peo: So now let us legislate, get ready, legislate… DIS-CRIM-I-NA-TION !
Reo: And flag burning too!

Marriage is the most enduring and important human institution, honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith.

Peo: And what could be more of a threat to this institution than two people who love and care for each other SO much that they want to join the ranks of the married themselves. Oh, that’s right, this is against gay people. So if the two people are gay, what does that have to do with anything?
Reo: If you get married…
Peo: Some day, some way.
Reo: What does it have to do with me?
Peo: Other than the toast?
Reo: Toast?
Peo: Yes, you’ll give a toast at my wedding.
Reo: Oh, I was thinking of dry heated bread.
Peo: Mmmmm.
Reo: Anyway, I am not affected in any way by YOUR marriage am I?
Peo: No.
Reo: Whether you marry a man or woman wouldn’t affect me or my marriage.
Peo: No.
Reo: So WHAT IN THE HELL IS HE TALKING ABOUT? This is ludicrous...

Ages of experience have taught us that the commitment of a husband and a wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society. Marriage cannot be cut off from its cultural, religious, and natural roots without weakening this good influence on society. Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all.

Reo: Protect? Protect from what?
Peo: Terrorists!

In our free society, people have the right to choose how they live their lives. And in a free society, decisions about such a fundamental social institution as marriage should be made by the people -- not by the courts.

Peo: Courts, which are run by illegal aliens and robots!

The American people have spoken clearly on this issue, both through their representatives and at the ballot box. In 1996, Congress approved the Defense of Marriage Act by overwhelming bipartisan majorities in both the House and Senate, and President Clinton signed it into law. And since then, voters in 19 states have approved amendments to their state constitutions that protect the traditional definition of marriage. And today, 45 of the 50 states have either a state constitutional amendment or statute defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. These amendments and laws express a broad consensus in our country for protecting the institution of marriage.

Reo: The old “protecting” word again. Scare them! Scare the people then control them!

Unfortunately, activist judges and some local officials have made an aggressive attempt to redefine marriage in recent years. Since 2004, state courts in Washington, California, Maryland, and New York have overturned laws protecting marriage in those states.

Reo: Those gay liberal states!

And in Nebraska, a federal judge overturned a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Peo: No, not Nebraska! Not a red state!
Reo: Are we safe anywhere in our homes?

These court decisions could have an impact on our whole Nation. The Defense of Marriage Act declares that no state is required to accept another state's definition of marriage. If that act is overturned by activist courts, then marriages recognized in one city or state might have to be recognized as marriages everywhere else. That would mean that every state would have to recognize marriages redefined by judges in Massachusetts or local officials in San Francisco, no matter what their own laws or state constitutions say.

Peo: Be sure and mention the gay places again.

This national question requires a national solution, and on an issue of such profound importance, that solution should come from the people, not the courts.

An amendment to the Constitution is necessary because activist courts have left our Nation with no other choice. The constitutional amendment that the Senate will consider next week would fully protect marriage from being redefined, while leaving state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage. A constitutional amendment is the most democratic solution to this issue, because it must be approved by two-thirds of the House and Senate and then ratified by three-fourths of the 50 state legislatures.

Peo: OK, that’s it, let’s talk about…
Reo: Pop music?
Peo: Democracy. American democracy. This country has a history of getting caught up in a frenzy about some issue, often involving discrimination, and passing laws about the issue.
Reo: Japanese Americans.
Peo: So the third branch, the court system, looks at the issue and makes sure the new laws do not violate the Constitution.
Reo: Or they go along with it, only to our later regret.
Peo: Exactly. Here, states and localities try to pass laws that discriminate in the eyes of the judge. He or she is saying that your new law is unconstitutional. The judge didn’t make the law, the judge is invalidating it.
Reo: Gotcha.
Peo: So why is this judge activist? He or she is not. Validating an unconstitutional law is more activist because it is changing the status quo.
Reo: So he really should be railing against these conservative judges.
Peo: Yeah, these judges trying to uphold that old Constitution!

As this debate goes forward, we must remember that every American deserves to be treated with tolerance, respect, and dignity. All of us have a duty to conduct this discussion with civility and decency toward one another, and all people deserve to have their voices heard.

Reo: Therefore, the President does not support the mass deportation of gays and activist judges.
Peo: Nor the wearing of rainbow arm bands.
Reo: Which we could use to keep these gays away from our families and churches.
Peo: And away from our schools and boy scouts.
Reo: And everyone should go to a barber shop because it is less gay than a beauty shop.

A constitutional amendment will put a decision that is critical to American families and American society in the hands of the American people, which is exactly where it belongs. Democracy, not court orders, should decide the future of marriage in America.

Reo: Not critical to families, not critical to society…
Peo: The strength of democracy is protecting minorities not blindly doing the bidding of the majority.

Thank you for listening.

Reo: No, thank you for forcing another non-issue down our throats while not dealing with war, the environment, election reform, tax reform and gas prices.

Labels: ,


Blogger John said...

hey guys, I really like this post, I love to discuss topics on marriage, I remember when I was in college and did a study called before marriage, which criticizes develop a major cause of divorce

Wednesday, March 24, 2010 4:13:00 PM


Post a Comment

<< Home