Bush and Gay Unions
Posted by Julie Ponzi
I have not heard much said about this story today. Why is Bush saying this and why is he saying it now? I have no great insight on either question--except to say that if he is saying it, he must believe it. Anyone else?
2:55 AM / October 28, 2004
: include(/srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/sd/nlt-blog/_includes/promo-main.php): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in
: include(): Failed opening '/srv/users/prod-php-nltashbrook/apps/prod-php-nltashbrook/public/sd/nlt-blog/_includes/promo-main.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/opt/sp/php7.2/lib/php') in
Julie,
This is what’s known as a "flip-flop." Don’t worry, though. George Bush hasn’t let his base down as you can see here:
(thanks to Professor Muller)
This is not a “new position”. Bush has said from the start of this issue that he would not interfere if the people of a particular state voted overwhelmingly to support civil unions of gays. His position has been that at the Federal level, marriage would be defined as between a man and woman. And, he feared that legislating judges would determine what a marriage was and enforce it upon the state legislature as was done in Massachusetts. Bush wants it crystal clear at the state and federal level that one states version of marriage will not trump another states. It’s that small part of the Constitution that says anything not already mentioned is the inherent right of the states to determine.