I got this email today....(about gay rights)

[markjs]

Dear MoveOn member,
In less than 48 hours, Congress will vote on an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would permanently deny marriage equality to same-sex couples. This is unprecedented -- never before has our Constitution been amended to take away anyone's rights. We've got to fight back.

Please sign on to our emergency petition to Congress to stop this divisive amendment at:

http://www.moveon.org/unitednotdivided/

Then please ask your friends and family to sign, by forwarding them this email. We'll deliver our comments tomorrow, before the vote, so we need as many people as possible to sign on today.

President Bush campaigned on a promise to unite us, not divide us. Yet today, as people are questioning Bush's handling of everything from the war in Iraq to the economy, Bush and his friends are trying to distract voters from the real issues by turning to the politics of division and hate.

If America stands for anything, it stands for equal rights and opportunities for everyone. Throughout our history, we've struggled to guarantee that equality: ending slavery; securing voting rights for women; and passing the Civil Rights Act just 40 years ago.

Equality in marriage is the civil rights issue of our generation. We can't let anyone, or any group, be singled out for discrimination based on who they are or who they love.

When two people make a deep personal commitment, taking responsibility for each other and doing all the work of marriage, they should be able to share in the legal benefits of marriage as well. These benefits include access to health care and medical decision-making for one's partner and children, parenting and immigration rights, inheritance, taxation, and Social Security benefits.

This isn't a partisan issue, notwithstanding Bush's pandering to his right-wing base. Former President Gerald Ford, a Republican, said this about same-sex couples and marriage: "I think they ought to be treated equally. Period."1 Also, many major corporations, including Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Disney, Coors, and IBM, offer health insurance and other benefits to their employees' same-sex partners. Senator Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) says the amendment is "Nuts... To be seen as the party that's coming between two people that love each other doing what they want to do... to me that's going to be seen as a liability, politically."2

Yet President Bush is bent on moving America backward, by enshrining discrimination in the United States Constitution.

Don't let him divide us like this. Go to:

http://www.moveon.org/unitednotdivided/

Please help make sure your friends have signed on too, before we deliver this petition tomorrow.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
--Carrie, Joan, Lee, Marika, Noah, Peter, and Wes
The MoveOn.org Team
Monday, July 12th, 2004

P.S.: See our website for more information.

Footnotes:

1. Detroit News: "Gerald Ford: Treat Gay Couples Equally", by Deb Price, 10/29/01.

2. AP: "Senate to Debate Marriage Amendment"

 

[Gonz]

never before has our Constitution been amended to take away anyone's rights

One last time, from the top...

MARRIAGE IS NOT A RIGHT

 

[Gonz]

Cool.... 2 for one night at the bijou

we've struggled to guarantee that equality: ending slavery; securing voting rights for women; and passing the Civil Rights Act just 40 years ago.

Let's see, the first was Commanded by a Republican President & the following two were passed by Republican Congress'. Where are those damned Democrats when the opressed need them?

 

[Gato_Solo]

Equality in marriage is the civil rights issue of our generation. We can't let anyone, or any group, be singled out for discrimination based on who they are or who they love.

I agree with that. Any man should be able to marry any woman who will have him, and vice-versa. If they would've just stuck to their 'principals', instead of tying this to civil rights, I'd agree with them, but, to equate their struggle with those who are actually visible is pandering at best, and grossly inaccurate. How do you determine if something is a civil rights issue? I'll tell you.

1. Are you of a different race, or sex?

That's it. There is no way to tell if someone is gay/lesbian or not by just looking...unless they are dressed for the part and it isn't Halloween. Even then, you can't be sure. They have a right to choose their partner. I'll agree with that, but to call it marriage is a sham.

 

[chcr]

In less than 48 hours, Congress will vote on an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would permanently deny marriage equality to same-sex couples. This is unprecedented -- never before has our Constitution been amended to take away anyone's rights. We've got to fight back.

If you pay attention to the news, they're not even close to bringing it to a vote. They probably never will be. It's a political football both sides are using to stir up the the faithful. It's a non-issue in the election and it will likely never be addressed on a federal level.

 

[MrBishop]

One last time, from the top...

MARRIAGE IS NOT A RIGHT

Granted...Marriage is not a right. Why then, amend the constitution to deny marriage for certain couples?

 

[Gonz]

Because certain members of the Judiacial branch are putting politics ahead of legalities & are attempting to create law from the bench.

 

[MrBishop]

Because certain members of the Judiacial branch are putting politics ahead of legalities & are attempting to create law from the bench.

I couldn't agree with you more.

 

[PowerballWinner]

I signed it and called my Senators.

 

[Gonz]

I signed it and called my Senators.

I didn't & did too. Not likely on the same side though

 

[ResearchMonkey]

One last time, from the top...

MARRIAGE IS NOT A RIGHT

MARRIAGE IS A RITE

a ritual, a time honored tradtion, the rite of marraige.

Plookers can get married the same as I can, if they want something different, it should be called something different.

What so wrong with protecting it as is?

(wonder if kerry and edwards will show up for werk?)

 

[markjs]

Personally I'd settle for legal civil unions that afford them all the rights of a heterosexual couple but they are not in favor of that.

And if even one person read and signed this petition then my posting is worth it. Thanks Powerball.

 

[Professur]

I'm all for gay rights.

1. You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions.

2. Anything you do say may be used against you in a court of law.

3. You have the right to consult an attorney before speaking to the police and to have an attorney present during questioning now or in the future.

4. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you before any questioning if you wish.

5. If you decide to answer questions now without an attorney present you will still have the right to stop answering at any time until you talk to an attorney

6. Knowing and understanding your rights as I have explained them to you

Yup, I'm all for them. j/k

 

[MrBishop]

The GOP sets up for an eternal war against gay-marriage.

By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent

WASHINGTON - Bracing for defeat on one of President Bush (news - web sites)'s campaign-season priorities, Republicans vow that not even a Senate setback will halt their drive to enact a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

"I don't think it's going away after this vote," Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said Tuesday on the eve of a test vote. "I think the issue will remain alive," he added, virtually conceding the amendment would fall short of the 60 votes needed to advance.


Whatever its future in Congress, there were signs that supporters of the amendment intended to use it in the campaign already unfolding.


"The institution of marriage is under fire from extremist groups in Washington, politicians, even judges who have made it clear that they are willing to run over any state law defining marriage," Republican senatorial candidate John Thune says in a radio commercial airing in South Dakota. "They have done it in Massachusetts and they can do it here," adds Thune, who is challenging Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle for his seat.

...

source

 

[Gato_Solo]

"The institution of marriage is under fire from extremist groups in Washington, politicians, even judges who have made it clear that they are willing to run over any state law defining marriage," Republican senatorial candidate John Thune says in a radio commercial airing in South Dakota. "They have done it in Massachusetts and they can do it here," adds Thune, who is challenging Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle for his seat.

If judges would follow the law, instead of changing it, then all this wouldn't even be an issue. The rite (not right) of marriage is not a function of the state anyway. It's a function of the church. The state only monitors and 'legalizes' the marriage in order to keep tax and birth records straight. It was also to prevent marriages that the state deemed illegal, such as gay marriage, and the problems we have today. Once the government gets involved in your private life, these things happen.

And you wonder why I'm conservative.

 

[chcr]

I still say if you want them to be equal, let them marry. If you don't want to let them marry, don't pretend they're equal. Priviledge, right or rite, you are treating them differently specifically because of their sexual preferences, and that, IMO, significantly fails to be equality.

What I really don't understand is why everyone thinks it's such a BFD anyway.

 

[Rose]

I still say if you want them to be equal, let them marry. If you don't want to let them marry, don't pretend they're equal. Priviledge, right or rite, you are treating them differently specifically because of their sexual preferences, and that, IMO, significantly fails to be equality.

What I really don't understand is why everyone thinks it's such a BFD anyway.

/me dittos

i couldn't have come close to arranging the English language in such a way that my views were voiced, but you came damn close.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

I still say if you want them to be equal, let them marry. If you don't want to let them marry, don't pretend they're equal. Priviledge, right or rite, you are treating them differently specifically because of their sexual preferences, and that, IMO, significantly fails to be equality.

Yuppers, do away with the man/woman labels too, after all we are equals.

 

[chcr]

Yuppers, do away with the man/woman labels too, after all we are equals.

They're just words, why do they bother you so much. I know which ones I'm going to have sex with, do you?

Edit: of course I meant which one (if I know whats good for me ).

 

[Gato_Solo]

I still say if you want them to be equal, let them marry. If you don't want to let them marry, don't pretend they're equal. Priviledge, right or rite, you are treating them differently specifically because of their sexual preferences, and that, IMO, significantly fails to be equality.

What I really don't understand is why everyone thinks it's such a BFD anyway.

Because of one thing...Marriage is a sacred rite, created by the church. The government has no business involved in marriage at all, except to register the marriage. It has more to do with government meddling in a private affair than equal rights, and I'm sure, deep down, you know it. Once again...marriage is not a right. Never has been, and, unless you like the government dictating to you who you should marry, and how your family should be set up, it never should be. Only a completly self-serving, and ignorant, individual would assume that marriage, based on 3,000 years of church policy, should be controlled by the government in any way.