This would be the first time the United States Constitution could be used to deny a group of people rights.
Is the man dangerously out of control?
2007-01-04 05:36:02 · 24 answers · asked by kevin 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
This whole administration is completely out of control, and Bush breaks the laws, afterall, he's king, in his mind at least.
It’s not only that Bush is dangerously out-of-control, it’s that large part of our country is in complete denial about it.
2007-01-04 05:52:01 · answer #1 · answered by Lurker 4 · 7⤊ 1⤋
No. The majority of the country seems to support him on this issue. What we permit increases. Next the Nudist will want to marry the transgender. A man will want to marry his dog and he says if he can't carry Rover on his income tax you can't carry your gay friend on yours. It is getting out of control already. Look at Rosie and Donald, they are already fighting. None of these marriages will increase our population. We need people working so we can get our social security checks. We barely have an army now because of abortion. If everybody turns gay, we can shut America down. No. Bush is right on this one. You gay guys need to go straight and help out the country. We've got to multiply, not immigrate. Forty years ago, we didn't have any Muslims in America either. Some dummy said immigrate, don't multiply and he just about ruined America. It all started after WWII and it became ignamania in the 60's. Free sex for everybody. Evolution said we came from monkeys and published that monkey to man chart everywhere. Some doe doe said abortion is not killing a baby and another dumb judge believed it. Some Lesbian from Austin, Texas, said she was offended by prayer in school and the Supreme Court removed prayer. God always blessed our children's prayers. Anything goes in Hollywood so California let Satanism become a religion and now we have over one million Satanist. Every movie produced calls God's name in vain and the Supreme Court supports this but not prayer in school. Our motto is still IN GOD WE TRUST but the Supreme Court remains confused.
I am dangerously out of control. Our President is highly intelligent. Our President stands for something and he isn't wishy washy. You will see the Democrats can't handle the war any better than the Republicans. What everyone forgets is both Democrats and Republicans voted for war. It was not a Bush thing. Spain doesn't know what to do with this war. Brittain doesn't know what to do with this war. France doesn't know what to do with this war. Israel has been shouting for peace since 1948. The terrorists are setting up every country for a world wide war WWW. Take your little gay self back into that closet, close the door and let the straight guys handle this war. At least their head is on straight.
2007-01-04 07:16:32 · answer #2 · answered by Jeancommunicates 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Senator McCain said yesterday that the reason the Republicans lost power in the last election is that they lost sight of why they were their, the leadership let it get to their heads that they were in power and acted inappropriately in regards to economic issues, the lives of servicemen, the enactment of legislation to be used against Americans regarding privacy issues, and the handling of the war on terror. I think in retrospect the last few years will be remembered as being like a horrible game of Wild Wild West only instead of on a school playground using imaginations, in real time on a global scale using real lives and live ammunition.
The pursuit of civil rights is guaranteed by The Constitution to all the law abiding citizens. Regarding SSM, if a Constitutional amendment does it passed without being repealed by the USSC, the value of the Constitution will be reduced to that of a roll of Charmin.
Is the man out of control? I think the above pretty much adds up to a yes.
2007-01-04 06:04:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
sure, regardless of the indisputable fact that it heavily isn't a "marriage" and that's what, rightfully, i believe is at stake. it really is largely a union of similar sexed persons which will be legitimately regarded through courts of regulation. A 'marriage' is between persons who're nicely equipped to furnish a relatives and proceed the rigidity of humanity. what's being called a "marriage" is basically a technique of mutual adoption and an attractiveness of an ethical correct to finish that, which should be fantastic.
2016-10-16 23:27:53 · answer #4 · answered by fernande 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Not only is it dangerous, it is also going to start a war in America, if this is to be brought to term.
Marriage between gay and lesbian couples, is MORE than just marriage. It is the opportunity to give Lesbian and Gay couples RIGHTS and not only them, but also other rights, respect, acceptance.
Men and women deserve the SAME respect as any American.
I myself have an argument.
If Bush so apposes the union between gay or lesbian couples, because its an underlinement with his statement that "A marriage is ONLY and should be ONLY between a man and a woman,".....Then, WTF?
Its like...we should then put EVERY bible "rule" back into play. Such as, saying the plegde of alligence in schools. It has Gods name in it? Why did we get rid of that?
Its because America is now becoming a CULTURAL society. America is a melting pot. Not everyone believes in God as much anymore.
Not only that, but America was basically where anyone could worship God how they pleased. They escaped England, to basically build their OWN constitution and form rights to the ability of every man and woman that wished to be FREE. If we are not allowed to be FREE in doing whatever we feel we need to and is right, then what is it to be FREE in america?
My argument is, if it is Bush's only statement that should DEFINE a marriage between an man and a woman, why ELSE should he be against it? I don't want the bible version, I want to know WHY he is against it.
Thats my argument...
2007-01-04 06:01:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
With the Democrats in both the House and Senate such an amendment will never make it to the point of getting his "approval".
He is indeed dangerously out of control.
http://www.thousandreasons.org/reasons.php
http://www.iratecitizens.org/Dumbya/102Reasons.html
2007-01-04 05:46:08 · answer #6 · answered by IndyT- For Da Ben Dan 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bush is in way over his head...he has the IQ of a paperclip..and if you watch him on TV he looks like he's about to "Snap". I suppose it's not funny at all but rather sad...I'm not an American but I can't help but feel uncomfortable watching him squirm in front of the TV cameras...The man is dangerous and out of control, in my opinion.
2007-01-04 05:58:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Bush supports this evil amendment, Clinton and Obama are both opposed to gay marriage.
We need a valid 3rd party candidate in 2008.
2007-01-04 06:16:33 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Yes he is, if they control what YOU guys do it won't be long before the government starts tell everyone gay or straight what they can and can't do. I don't need that.
This should stay with the states. Let the residents keep voting.
2007-01-04 06:18:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Dangerously out of control is absolutely right. He's made the situation in Iraq worse, not better, and to top it off, he's going to initiate a surge in troops (and not even to train Iraq soldiers), which will most likely result in more deaths of U.S. soldiers and increased violence.
2007-01-04 05:40:51 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 1⤋