This (below) is from the New York Times article posted today. Thank Humanity that there are people who still think consciously. Who gave whom the right to govern LOVE and how one will will love?
My favorite part of another article was quoted from a Republican rep. stating that Republicans care more about the external issues i.e. environment, war, healthcare, etc. when they should really be concerned about ‘real issues’. What is that exactly? Gay marriage? Another quote from the NY TIMES article ” House Narrowly Rejects Senate Vote”:
“We were hoping to get over 50 percent, but that didn’t happen today, ‘’ said Sen. David Vitter, R-La., one of the amendment’s supporters.
‘’Eventually, Congress is going to have to catch up to the wisdom of the American people or the American people will change Congress for the better.'’
‘’We’re not going to stop until marriage between a man and a woman is protected, ‘’ said Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan.
WOW!
I do hope that everyone recognize that this will be in the 2008 ballot? I know that some reports have shown that our generation does not vote and that is why this destructive, incompetent, and poor, poor excuse for a leader Bush was put back into office. Before we refuse to vote believing our voice doesn’t make a difference ( I know the feeling 2x over) I would suggest that we first consider the source of that information.
Studies have shown that the majority of educated registered voters are DEMOCRATS- thinkers. These people including a few republicans and conservatives banned the ban on gay marriage, arguing to press for different issues. Rightly so. I’m suprised that the courts didn’t try to ban inter-racial marriage back in the day.
I am so incredibly disappointed in our government that marriage could be amended to the constitution let alone gay marriage. Since when was loving another Illegal and a Threat my family? Read Bleow.
________________________________________
NY TIMES:
WASHINGTON, June 7 The Senate today soundly rejected a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, dismissing arguments by social conservatives that federal intervention is needed to preserve the traditional tie between a man and woman.
After two days of sometimes emotional argument, the Senate voted 49-to-48 against shutting off debate on the issue, well short of the 60 votes needed to move ahead with formally considering the amendment, let alone the 67 votes required by the Constitution to approve it.
The decision effectively killed the issue for the year in the Senate, although the House of Representatives is expected it to consider its own version later this summer.
Democratic critics of the proposed amendment said its Republican authors advanced it to rally socially conservative voters even though lawmakers knew it would be defeated. Opponents of the amendment said that marriage should remain regulated by the states and that the same-sex ban should not be added to the Constitution.
“All over the country, married heterosexual couples are shaking their heads and wondering how exactly the prospect of gay marriage threatens the health of their marriages, ” said Senator Russell D. Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin.
Supporters of the ban gained one vote from the last time the Senate considered the issue prior to the 2004 election. But they still were unable to break the symbolic 50-vote threshold despite an increase in the Republican majority. Two Republicans who sided with them the last time, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, voted against limiting debate.
“The courts have basically upheld the right of states to legislate and protect themselves and that was not the case last time, ” Mr. Gregg said. “I don’t think we have to put it in the Constitution until there is some sort of court decision that would put the states at risk.”
Senate champions of the marriage amendment said they were not deterred by the outcome and promised to continue to press the issue. They said they were gaining ground at the state level, where voters and state legislatures continue to approve initiatives banning same-sex marriage.
“We have 45 states that have defined marriage as a union of a man and a woman, ” said Senator Sam Brownback, Republican of Kansas. “Since the last time we voted in the Senate, we’ve seen a total of 14 states take this issue up on the ballot. And you’ve got another seven set for this fall. So we are making progress.”
Though some Republicans have suggested the Senate would be better served politically by focusing on issues that voters see as more pressing, the author of the amendment did not see it that way.
“If it’s up to me, we’ll have a vote on this issue every year, ” said Senator Wayne Allard, Republican of Colorado. “I think it’s important to the American people.”
