our administration has no right to be defining marriage for the nation. Love is love is love.
2006-06-05 13:59:43 · 7 answers · asked by when irish eyes are smiling 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
While I agree with you that banning gay marriage is neither helpful nor within the government's most important jobs, I have to disagree with you. Marriage is, beyond any spiritual or moral arrangement, a civil, legal one, and as such, the government is supposed to define the arrangement. Obviously it shouldn't do so in a way that so blatantly discriminates against another group.
2006-06-05 14:10:02 · answer #1 · answered by James 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
They do if their constituents are asking them too. Before you show how totally assassin you are look up the definition of marriage in the dictionary. The American College Dictionary defines it as: "the legal union of a man with a woman for life". You can love whom ever or what ever you want, that is not marriage. If anyone is trying to redefine the word marriage, it's not the federal government, it's you. Why have any rules?
2006-06-05 21:19:00 · answer #2 · answered by rosi l 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I know of no attempt to define any words...except for when Bill Clinton wanted to re-define the word "is". If there is some move to define anything, it is only in response to the more than 98% of the population who consider themselves straight and somewhat moral.
Your left leaning news media has re-defined more words than the government even knows.
2006-06-06 01:05:00 · answer #3 · answered by dave51_m 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Federal Government has left marriage decisions up to the states. People in the states vote on these issues all the time. Personally, I think that anyone who is truly in love should be able to get married--especially with so many 'disposable' marriages going on today.
2006-06-05 21:05:53 · answer #4 · answered by Holiday Magic 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since our honest to goodness politicians figured out that they could define any word to manipulate an outcome that would best benefit them. And they say politicians are not honest? The best answer to your question would be Bill Clinton's answer "that depends on what your definition of is is." As an American woman, that was the single most embarrassing moment in US History. There are many legitimate dictionaries in circulation, maybe our tax dollar should send one to all of our politicians!
2006-06-05 22:13:14 · answer #5 · answered by MaHaa 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are tax breaks and inheritance laws and health benefits and various other money impacts beyond love.
However, being apparently more conservative than Bush, I think limited government has no business expanding itself into personal decisions.
Besides, he's just trying to buy people off before the election. There is no hope either that or the flag amendment will pass.
2006-06-05 21:04:34 · answer #6 · answered by DAR 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since B Clinton defined sex guess it is ok when it is what you want to hear lmao
2006-06-05 21:05:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋