Cheney Daughter Remark

[Bogart]

The thing that I think makes Kerry's comments troubling is not the topic nor the fact that he mentioned Mary Cheney specifically. What is troubling is that he was speaking from an uniformed point of view. He made the assumption that all gay Americans think the same way when clearly this is not the case. As a gay man, I find very little difference between Kerry's assumption and the assumption that all African-Americans think the same way simply because they are black, for example. His comments seem to indicate that he feels that all gays can be lumped together in the same way.

As to the question of choice---it is not. However, Bush was more intellectually honest because he admitted that he did not know.

[Bogart]

Just to provide some input through a fresh pair of eyes by someone with a vested interest in this topic, it seems pretty clear to me that the amendment as proposed DOES NOT prohibit same-sex marriage, but merely PREVENTS judicial review from interpreting the US Constitution, or the various state constitutions, so as to say that they already contain provisions which require recognition of same-sex marriage. Not sure which one of you is arguing this side without reviewing.

I see two parts....a part stating that marriage for Federal purposes shall be a man and a woman....and a part that says that no other parts of the Consitution may be interpreted by the courts to undermine the meaning of part one.

Seems clear as glass to me. Not that I agree with passing anything like it in any event.

[Bogart]

Here's what a defender of the Amendment says about it:

The Federal Marriage Amendment introduced in Congress takes a prudent and reasonable approach to the problem. It abolishes same-sex marriage in the United States, and prohibits judges from legalizing other forms of same-sex unions, while preserving both federalism in family law and local self-government by protecting the authority of the legislatures to establish state policy regarding whether (and to what extent) to give some legal benefits to unmarried — including same-sex — couples.

Really, this is just another interpretation. Defender or not, I think it's being interpreted incorrectly.