President Bush on NJ Same Sex Ruling: “another activist court”
EmailABC News’ Karen Travers Reports: Campaigning in Iowa today, President Bush said that in New Jersey yesterday there was "another activist court" issuing a ruling that "raises doubts about the institution of marriage."
"I believe that marriage is a union between a man and a woman and I believe it’s a sacred institution that is critical to the health of our society and the well-being of families, and it must be defended," he said.
Bush called marriage a "fundamental institution of civilization."
Yesterday, a Cheney official said the Vice President will not weigh in on the New Jersey decision and said the President sets the policy and Cheney supports the President.
Vice President Cheney said on the campaign trail in 2004 that the issue of gay marriage is one "that’s appropriately a matter for the states to decide."
"That that’s how it ought to best be handled," Cheney said in Iowa. He followed that by saying the President sets the policy for the administration – and we know that the President came out in support of the Marriage Protection Amendment this year.
Bush on gay marriage:
The gay marriage debate is not one the President frequently wades into. On June 5, 2006, President Bush called marriage "the most fundamental institution of civilization" and said he strongly supports an amendment that would define it as between a man and a woman. He presented his support for the amendment in the framework of activist judges who have made it necessary for a Constitutional amendment defining marriage and strengthening families.
"Our policy should aim to strengthen families, not undermine them. And changing the definition of marriage would undermine the family structure," Bush said.
Bush indicated in an interview with ABC News in 2004 that he supported civil unions. "I don’t think we should deny people rights to a civil union, a legal arrangement, if that’s what a state chooses to do so,” he said. "I view the definition of marriage different from legal arrangements that enable people to have rights. States ought to be able to have the right to pass laws that enable people to be able to have rights like others."
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters 
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
How about a ban against presidents that misleads this nation into a war of choice – a personal choice at that, a president whose decisions has destroyed the lives of so many innocent people, how about it if we had applied our main focus on those who attacked this country instead of diverting it to Iraq, how about having the maximum resources to stand down some real threats like North Korea and Iran, how about a band against representatives who talk about faith one day and try to seduce young boys the next, how about a ban against hypocrites. With those bans we’d could really achieve a lot of good for this country rather than focusing on matters such as if the vice president’s daughter can marry her partner or not. We are in a mess now because we have listen to these people and believed what they have said; when the fact of the matter is; if they had any real answers we would know it by now; because things would be getting better instead of getting worse. All Americans – republicans, democrats’ independents etc should look each other in the face and say lets do some meaningful things for this country and this world that will make life better for everyone! People have many different problems – some by choice and others by no choice at all. Short people, over weight people, even women still face difficulties in this country. We are in 2006 and none of this stuff should be going on today except there are those who are so hell bent on keeping such things alive – they even mock people with debilitating diseases – as hard as that is to believe. We’ve got to recognize wrong when we see it and try to make it right – How about it? Let’s start today.
Posted by: T. HINES | October 26, 2006, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm
The concept of independent judiciary is a foreign concept, I guess.
Other interpretation is anything Bushy believes is sacred, all else is evil. But then we knew that already.
And I guess all that crap in 2004 about civil unions was just blowing smoke.
Not the America I grew up in, and not the America I served.
Keep bashing til the election republicons . . . you’ve got 12 days to hurl every bigoted (and apparently racist ala tennessee) insult you can.
Posted by: John | October 26, 2006, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm
Same sex marriage should be banned in all 50 states.What you do in your private life is up to you,but even the Bible talks agaist same sex marriage.And thats the way it should be.If you wanna be gay and be married to the same sex, go move to another Country..
Posted by: Bert | October 26, 2006, 5:55 pm 5:55 pm
i agree with the president. if the courts dont support the majority of citizens about keeping a merrage between a man and a women then those judges need to be removed. they are confusing the children of our country.oh and by the way they are not gays they are homosexuals and lisbons and some of the are practiceing perverts
Posted by: ed | October 26, 2006, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm
I guess the President really does not believe that all people in the USA Have the same rights and that seperate but equal is not equal.This is not activist Judges these are Judges that understand our Constitution. This is something Bush has never understood. He and all the people who hate this equal rights for all of our citizens. Sorry Guys this is Still America and not Bushland
Posted by: David | October 26, 2006, 9:09 pm 9:09 pm
Way to go New Jersey. Hope other states will follow. Equal rights for all, isn’t that what it’s all about. And we need to keep the bible out of politics. A marriage is a relationship between or among individuals, usually recognized by civil authority. The courts did not say that one should go and marry in a church. “Religious persecution has come about because others are too afraid to learn about something new…”
Posted by: Denise | October 26, 2006, 10:58 pm 10:58 pm
Nice comments T Hines.
However, you forget that us Americans are inherently lazy and we won’t do anything unless we can make some money out of it, or there’s some sort of sex invlolved.
We’re happiest laying in our messy, crappy beds.
And the last I checked no one is handing out money or sex to anyone for being responsible citizens.
(Vote Robot)
Posted by: Bender | October 26, 2006, 11:03 pm 11:03 pm
I would like to ask all of those individuals that believe there should not be legal gay marriage one thing to start, Where in the Constitution does it say anything about marriage? I belive the Constitution grants us FREEDOMS not take them away. We are under the rule of LAW not the rule of God!!! If you do not belive this then maybe you are not a true AMERICAN. There was no such thing as a marriage license until whites wanted to marry slaves during the 1800′s. Look it up, did George Washington need a marriage license? Or Thomas Jefferson? I bet you will be amazed that they did NOT.
Posted by: Derik Lane | October 27, 2006, 9:24 am 9:24 am
IF WE DON’T STAND TOGETHER AS A NATION AND KEEP OUR VALUES SUCH AS
THE SANCTITIVITY OF MARRIAGE BETWEEN A MAN AND WOMAN, THERE WILL BE NO MORE VALUES. THE WORLD IS CONFUSING ENOUGH WITH SOME STRAIGHT COUPLES NOT LIVING UP TO THEIR END. WE NEED TO FOCUS MORE ON DECENT CHRISTIAN BEHAVOIR AS IN THE BOOK OF ROMANS, THAN GIVING SOMEONE THE RIGHT TO SIN. NOMATTER
HOW OTHERS TRY TO MAKE IT ACCEPTABLE, IT SIMPLY SHOULD NOT BE. AND I MUST ADMIT, I’M NO BIG FAN OF THE PRESIDENT, WHO ALLOWS THIS RIDICULOUS WAR TO GO ON BUT ON GAY MARRIAGE…HE HAS MY VOTE.
AND HOW ABOUT SLAPPING THESE BIG
INTERNET COMPANIES WITH BIG FINES
WHO ALLOWS CHILD PORNOGRAPHY WEB-SITES? HOW ABOUT NOT ALLOWING ANY CHILD UNDER THE AGE OF FOURTEEN IN CHAT ROOMS? OUR NATION HAS ALOT TO FIGURE OUT AND CLEAN UP!
Posted by: RHONDA WASHINGTON | October 27, 2006, 9:55 am 9:55 am
I agree with Rhonda. In fact, we need to get more of the bible into our everyday lives. To start, we at least should enact the following: — A law prohibiting planting two different types of seed in your garden, or wearing a garment made of two types of fabric (Lev 19:19)
– Allow women to be concubines (sex slaves/mistresses) (Lev 19:20)
– The death penalty for those who commit adultery (Lev 20:10) or curse their mother or father (Lev 20:10)
– A law outlawing shaving one’s head or beard (Lev 21:5) or wearing a tattoo or piercing (Lev 19:28)
– A law prohibiting anyone from marrying a non-virgin or divorced woman (Lev 21:7 and 13) (now that would preserve the sanctity of marriage!)
– A law prohibiting marriage outside your own race (Lev 21:14) (if you’re mixed race, you would be prohibited from marrying)
– A law prohibiting work on the Sabbath (Lev 23:3) (i.e., everything, all businesses, power plants, water works, police departments, etc., must be shut down on the Sabbath, because otherwise the penalty, according to the Bible, is death)
– A law making polygamy okay. (Gen 29)
– Laws to discourage making money (Mark 10:25)
– A law requiring women to wear hats or coverings when praying (1Cor 11:15)
And that’s just the start. Of course, there are other biblical passages which are meant to be ignored, like
– 1 Sam 18: 1-4, 1 Sam 20:41-42, 2 Sam 1:23, 26-27, which seems to indicate that David and Jonathan were gay partners
– The passages where David, the man after God’s own heart (1 Sam 13:14), had homosexual relationships (see above), committed adultery and murder (2 Sam 11-12)
Posted by: Peter | October 27, 2006, 11:04 am 11:04 am
What about the Christian values of the new testament? Jesus had a lot to say about a new covenant wit the people – a new commandment to love one another.
As a gay man, I am not asking for your acceptance or even your understanding. But I and others am and will continue to DEMAND equal representation in our nation. We pay the same taxes, we have the same birthright, and we share in the responsibilties to our country and our fellow citizens. And, for that reason, we deserve the same benefits.
That is why any movement to establish majority prejudices in our founding documents reeks to the high heavens you claim to seek.
I wil NOT let you claim the mantle of Christianity. You know nothing about me, or my faith, or the goodness that God has placed in me.
I can tell from your message that you are a good person and that you care very deeply; but you are not the only one and your beliefs are not so strong that they can cancel out mine.
I also worry for our nation. We have an administration who has no respect for the core values of my faith. They may as well be asking, “Who would Jesus torture?” than “What would Jesus do?”
We must learn to live together, but that will never happen if the solution is to slamming the door on those who don’t believe exactly as you do. That is a grave, grave threat to our nation. Doing that would harm us more than any terrorist ever could.
Posted by: John | October 27, 2006, 11:22 am 11:22 am
Since january 2000 & still counting the bush addministraition has been setting new standards for contridictions and that word should be the foundation for there party.First they play with your religous standings then its are you an american now its what god would want.New Jersey has taken a bold step to give human beings a choice to go public with their union.Now I feel you should be with whom ever makes your time here as plesent and happy with all the love anyone deserves,cause with all of our vices time is a luxury that won’t be contradicted not even for a vote.
Posted by: Warren | October 27, 2006, 11:34 am 11:34 am
HEY ED
RE:OCT 26, 2006 6:06:55PM
A. LEARN TO SPELL
B. RESEARCH WILL PROVE THAT THERE ARE MORE HETROSEXUAL PERVERTS THAN THERE ARE HOMOSEXUAL PERVERTS!
Posted by: RICK | October 27, 2006, 12:15 pm 12:15 pm
Didn’t the court essentially throw the case back to the legislature? Isn’t that what a Republican would want? I guess pulling out the moth-eaten “activist court” phrase is just another way to pander to the base. Don’t explain, Don’t illuminate – there’s no time for that before the election.
Posted by: Steve | October 27, 2006, 12:24 pm 12:24 pm
Hei Bert
Rhonda wrote:
“WE NEED TO FOCUS MORE ON DECENT CHRISTIAN BEHAVOIR”
Decent Christian Behavior is different than Christians with Decent Behavior….
It’s obvious in your post and other so called christians post around here that although you might know what is a Decent Christian Behavior you fail miserabily on being a Christians with Decent Behavior.
Posted by: Marcus | October 27, 2006, 1:59 pm 1:59 pm
OK, first of all the constitution states that congress shall not make a national religion, see Church of England. It does not say separation of church and state. Also David was not gay and that is insane to assume that. Also the new testament in 1 Cor. chapter 6 does state that homosexuals shall not enter the kingdom of Heaven. Now if the country wants to allow civil unions through a justice of the peace then the country can decide to do that. However we do not have the right to force the Church to accept gay marriage. The gay community doesn’t just want civil unions. They want the Church to accept sin. That will never happen. Also Gay Marriage is not a civil rights issue. Being gay is a preferrence. One can’t help what color they are or gender and therefore should not be discriminated against. However if you make a choice to live your life a certain way or do certain things you leave yourself open to be criticized. Also for the person quoting levitical law, We do not follow levitical law since Jesus died on the Cross and Rose again. Also 80% of Americans and 97% of the framers of the constitution professed to be Christians. Also more than 2/3rds of Americans support a Gay Marriage Ban.
Posted by: grant wadsworth | October 27, 2006, 2:15 pm 2:15 pm
Boy-oh-boy, this topic sure gets people riled. I’m so glad that morality can be legislated and that the government is good enough to go into people’s bedrooms to straighten things out. People complain about a “Nanny state” which over-taxes, over-regulates, and infringes on our personal freedoms in so many ways. Yet, these same people seem to want the government to legislate what you should or shouldn’t be and how you should or shouldn’t live your life…too bad they can’t legislate against hyprocrisy…whatever happened to “judge not, lest ye be judged”?
Posted by: Dirik Lolkus | October 27, 2006, 3:22 pm 3:22 pm
The President is dishonest. The only thing that the New Jersey Court held was that homo sexuals were entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals. This is what I thought our President considered tobe proper. The Court left open to the Legislature to determine how this was to be done – i.e. marriage, civil union. I guess the President wants to types of citizens – one with rights and one without. It is time to stop pretending and realize who we are. Look in the mirror. If we are ready to recognize that our choice of sexual preference – homosexual or heterosexual, is not under a person’s control but like skin color and age and sex is determined by genetic makeup then we have no right to say to one group – homosexuals, that because how you were born you will not receive the same rights and benefits as are available by law to others. That is what equal rights is all about and that is what the Newe Jersey Court determined. Until now I had assumed that our President understood this when he talked about assuring homosexuals the same rights as heterosexuals. Obviously, I and others were wrong. Simply put, George W. Bush is a bigot and will discriminate whenever necessary to obtain a politial point. This man has no morals.
Posted by: Joel Field | October 27, 2006, 4:24 pm 4:24 pm
Sorry Rhonda, but not only am I not going to stand with you, I’m gonna stand as far away from you as possible.
And Peter, does the phrase “seperation of church and state” mean anything to you?
I’m not a christian and I also am not forcing my religious beliefs/customs on you. Nor do I expect you do adopt my beliefs.
There’s no place for religion in politics so both of you have invalidated your own comments.
PS Rhonda, you are clearly distressed and I suggest taking a chill-pill.
(Vote Robot)
Posted by: Bender | October 27, 2006, 8:11 pm 8:11 pm
Grant….could not find your logic in interpreting New Test. 1Cor,ch 6. …homosexuals will not enter into heaven. ??
Posted by: Frank | October 28, 2006, 4:25 pm 4:25 pm
Thank you Dirik L., for stating the obvious. Gay people DO NOT have a choice, as every self proclaimed Christian seems to think. It is their genetic makeup & they can no more change it than they can the color of their skin. They should have the same rights as any other American citizen. Bush has one agenda, his own & we should all think the same as him if we are to have moral values. BS!
Posted by: jt | October 30, 2006, 9:52 pm 9:52 pm
Polygamous marriage was all the rage in the New Testament. There is not one mention of “one man/one woman.” Men took additional wives if their own was “barren.” Men took their sisters-in-laws as wives when their brothers died. Adam and Eve produced grandchildren when, according to the Bible, Eve was the only female in existence.
In the New Testament, monogamy came into fashion, but it did not come without risks. Those who married someone not of their faith were banished. Women who were married, then found not to be virgins were stoned to death.
That the Bible is used to define marriage defies reason. That the Bible is used to deprive any American of constitutional rights is assinine.
Posted by: TennMom | October 31, 2006, 2:11 am 2:11 am
Well said, TennMom!
So much for the phrase “sanctity of marriage” that some people want to bandy around.
Posted by: Devon | October 31, 2006, 9:10 am 9:10 am
To all the above. Interesting thoughts ! But I keep wondering why people want to seperate church from state ? Was’nt this country founded with church playing a huge part in it? Look up Lincoln and Washingtons beliefs. They are the men who founded our country…and many others like them . Why else is “IN GOD WE TRUST” inscribed on our currency? I do believe there is a chance of male sperm not being able to completely change a totally female egg, there by creating a difference in sexual preference, along with a whole list of other traits from early childhood! But I also think there are many more out there who make a choice, for a whole list 0f reasons ! “GOD does not make any junk!” but there are things that we choose to do that alters GODS intent. We drink and smoke while pregnant or worse yet were on drugs when we concieved…just for an example of many more ways to flaw GOD’s creation . Thats all I have to say—these are things I have pondered for a long time. Comments welcomed < Bless You
Posted by: openminded | October 31, 2006, 5:33 pm 5:33 pm
Why do people think that the courts are a true and accurate portrayal of the majorities beliefs? Why does no one want to put this on a ballot this election for the American people to decide once and for all? It couldn’t possibly be that the courts don’t speak for us? Why are we letting the minority write the laws for the majority? If our representatives can’t speak for us in the courts, then we do need a constitutional ammendment to stand for our values and beliefs.
Posted by: yvonne | November 1, 2006, 12:57 am 12:57 am
Our Constitution never had gays in mind when it was written. There is no protection what so ever in the constitution for gays . Wake up. Marriage is between a man and a women. If you want to shack with another man so be it or if a woman want’s to shack with another woman so be it. I won’t ask and you don’t tell. Keep it in the bed room..
Posted by: a.w. | November 3, 2006, 10:26 pm 10:26 pm
I have only a couple of things to say. This world is doomed. There are so many of you sick puppies out there that God will have to destroy us. May God bless your souls.
Posted by: mary | August 28, 2007, 4:32 pm 4:32 pm
All you heterosexuals can argue until you are blue in the face, these sick people you are arguing with do not want to know the entire Bible, They cherry pick a scripture and use it to back them up. If they knew the entire Bible, it might scare them to death and make them change their ways. Let them thumb their noses at God, He will have the final say. Until then we continue our fight against the evil that encroaches on our religious beliefs and trys to destroy all the world. Every gay who fights to change our laws is a part of it. They are seeking to rule the world with their beliefs and evil acts but what they don’t realize is that they already rule the world. As is promised, this is the only life they shall have along with all the other false religions and pagans in the world. They have no desire to know the truth which is the written word. Let us Christians continue to fight for our rights and stop trying to teach them what they don’t want to know, their eyes are shut and ears are closed. If they choose to be gay, that is their choice,God has already judged as to what will happen to them. I am straight, and as a Christian who lives my religion, I pray that God touches the heart of each and every gay and they repent before it is too late. They should Read Revelations and if they don’t understand it, and truly want to, then get a priest or preacher to interpret it for them.
Posted by: mary | August 28, 2007, 5:34 pm 5:34 pm
Why is it that the people who claim to speak for God as if they know everything can NEVER spell nor construct a grammatically correct sentence?? It’s beyond me.
Mary, the punctuation after “blue in the face” should be a dash, not a comma. The punctuation after “Bible” should be a period. There should be a hyphen between “cherry” and “pick.” “Up” is a preposition and should not end a sentence. The punctuation after “noses at God” should be a dash, not a comma. “Trys” is misspelled and should be “tries.” Your comment “Every gay who fights to change our laws is a part of it” doesn’t make sense, as you’ve not defined what “it” is. Suggesting that gays want to rule the world, when the gay rights movement is clearly about allowing them equal rights is ludicrous, as are the following sentences. “Let us Christians” should be “Let we Christians.” The punctuation after “don’t want to know” should be a dash, not a comma. “Read” should not be capitalized. The book’s title is Revelation, not Revelations.
And really, more importantly, if you need a priest or preacher to interpret the Bible for you… you obviously don’t have the Holy Spirit within you. So I can’t take ANY of your biblical comments as being credible.
Posted by: bd1421 | July 23, 2008, 2:09 am 2:09 am