(no subject)

[apocalypsos]

Dear President Bush,

Your constitutional amendment is probably not going to pass, but thanks bunches for making sure future generations can look at the history books and have official verification you're a hateful, ignorant homophobe.

Sincerely,

Me

Comments

[ceejayoz.livejournal.com]

Please, think of the kittens!

[gremite.livejournal.com]

Bush is insane. Hes trying to make an AMENDMENT out of an opinion. You can't make laws based on opinions and religious ideas, its insane. Aren't we supposed to be secular?

Erh... Devils advocate.

[zaeron.livejournal.com]

P.S. Thank you, Mister Bush, for doing what we wish all the other politicians would do and supporting the things the populace in general wants, as well as your own personal moral values. We wish you'd do it on another subject, but thanks.

And, uh, I'd just like to note that I'm really, honestly, not trolling. I've been lurking for a while, and I suppose I should probably say hi too ^_^

I may not support the amendmant, but... I must admit, I'm suprised that he'd actually go through with what his voters want, and this really is what they want... So... I don't really see how I can blame him for it, either. He is no more hateful and ignorant than the 51% of the country that voted for him.

Re: Erh... Devils advocate.

[smolder.livejournal.com]

He actually lost the popular vote by roughly 1/2 million votes.

And the % of people who support the amendment is fluctuating around 48%

So, no, he's just doing what he wants.

Re: Erh... Devils advocate.

[zaeron.livejournal.com]

Hm... Okay, I'll eat my words.

However, I would note that "fluctuating" around 48% still puts things well within the margin of error, either way.

However, I back the underlying point - I don't think it's fair to fault the guy for doing what we've asked before - which is for our politians to go through with their promises once elected. If nothing else, Bush was very straightforward - he is a Republican, and outside of the spending things, which it could be argued aren't entirely his fault, he has largely stuck to that.

I do agree that this isn't a situation that should be dealt with an amendment to the constitution, and I support gay marriage - there are very good arguements for it, and few decent against it, but I think that it's plain that a fairly large portion of the populace doesn't think I like I do, either, and I think that it's the elected officals job to represent the people who elected them. The court are there for the minorities.

I'm not saying we should enslave every minority and go back to 1840, but I think that it's unreasonable to blame him for supporting his own parties wishes, just like everyone else.

Re: Erh... Devils advocate.

[kakoshen.livejournal.com]

You make an excellent point and you stated it well. All Bush has said is that he will support such an ammendment, it still takes the people and the states to make it law. Some states already have such a law, including California, and polls on the topic regularly come out with the majority of people opposing gay marriage, and the number is rising, not falling.

Re: Erh... Devils advocate.

[smolder.livejournal.com]

Opposing gay marriage, but not supporting the amendment. Support for the amendment drops daily.

The majority of Americans may, according to polls, oppose gay marriage, but the majority has been wrong time and time again. That's basic history.

Look at it this way, they want a Constitional Amendment because that will stop any judge, city, municipality or state from challenging them.

That is to say, they know, as with the Texas Sodomy Law case, if the Supreme Court has to look at their laws and weigh them againt Equal Protection, they will lose.

So, basically, the Constitution protects gays and they want to strip that protection away. Is that really what we want to use that document for?

Re: Erh... Devils advocate.

[kittinz.livejournal.com]

Bush has not kept a single promise he made to the American people. He promised to be a 'compassionate conservative'. This is neither compassionate nor conservative. He also promised to be a uniter not a divider. When he cannot win an election on the merits of his accomplishments, he chooses to divide the nation based on prejustices that have been proven by science for more than a generation to be incorrect.

[dreamt.livejournal.com]

Came here, regularly, from Metaquotes.
I am so very much adding you now, finally, since my friendslist won't deliver this morning and your layout is neat enough for me to get away with having the window open even during class <3 <3 <3
Hope you don't mind ^_^

You are delightfully funny.

[ingole.livejournal.com]

Now you, I like. Is it okay with you if I add you?

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

Sure. And thank you. :)

[ingole.livejournal.com]

Done and done. :)

[casapazzo.livejournal.com]

Seriously, dude. Fuck his veneer of "compassionate conservatism." We've always known he was a horrible, evil little man, and now he's finally come out with it so bluntly, it can't be ignored or denied.

(Well, except by other horrible, evil people, which sadly, there are too many of, but you get the point...)