AU's letter to Congress about the Marriage Amendment...

[mac2]

Link: http://www.au.org/press/pr040224.htm

"Americans United for Separation of Church and State today criticized President George W. Bush for endorsing a marriage amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Speaking at a press conference this morning, Bush asserted, “The union of a man and woman is the most enduring human institution, honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith….Marriage cannot be severed from its cultural, religious and natural roots without weakening the good influence of society.”

Said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director, “President Bush is just wrong. A growing number of religious groups perform marriages for same-sex couples. Bush’s proposal gives some religious traditions favored treatment.

“The Federal Marriage Amendment is a grave mistake,” Lynn continued. “The Constitution should protect the rights of all Americans; it should never be rewritten to take rights away.

“I do not want to see the legacy of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison revised by President Bush under pressure from Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell,” Lynn concluded."

You are so right Barry!!! Support AU.

[BR_Parkway]

1. Thankfully, some sanity in this discussion

and a reasoning that the mainstream public can understand. We should forward this out to everyone we know. Even those who we thought would be against gays marrying have actually been saying something else all along. Not that they'd admit it now.

• “The First Amendment says Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof—nothing about a wall of separation, nothing about separation of church and state! Merely, Congress can’t set up a national religion. End of story.” Pat Robertson
  “The 700 Club,” April 11, 1986, Christian Broadcasting Network (reported in Church & State, April
  1996, p. 10)
  
  
• “What’s needed is a constitutional amendment protecting the rights of students and other citizens to voice their religious convictions and apply their faith to everyday issues. It would require an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to protect voluntary school prayer and religious liberty generally.”James Dobson
  Solid Answers (Tyndale House Publishers), 1997, p. 189
  
  Ok, my religion says gays ok to marry.

[thebaghwan]

2. I fear that should the amendment banning gay marriages pass and Bush

is reelected we would see more attempts to amend the constitution to the aims and goals of the religious r/w.

[myopic4141]

4. Establishment violation

If Pat Robertson is true to his statement about the establishment clause, then he should be for the removal of "under God" from the "Pledge of Allegiance" for it was an act of Congress in 1954 that incorporated the words into an oath of fealty (originally written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy, a Christian Socialist). The enactment of this law now disenfranchises millions of American citizens by forcing a choice of tacitly disavowing a "no God exists" position to participate in a patriotic expression or forgo participation to avow the position. Since Congress codified the "under God" inclusion into the "Pledge of Allegiance", Congress established the religious position of God's existence via an act of law which violates the establishment clause.
The same is true for "IN GOD WE TRUST" found on the US currency. An act of Congress in 1837 established that Congress determines what mottos and devices are to be minted on the coins of the realm and that no changes can be made without an act of Congress. In 1863, Congress enacted a law that placed "OUR COUNTRY", "OUR GOD", or "GOD, OUR COUNTRY" on the one, two, and three cent coins. In 1864, the motto was changed to "IN GOD WE TRUST" on the one and two cent coins. As time passed, Congress enacted laws placing the motto on all coins until 1957 when it was placed on the paper currency as well. Once again, Congress violated the establishment clause by forcing everyone who used the paper currency to tacitly accept the existence of God.
Personally, on the motto, I think it should be "IN GOD WE TRUST, EVERYBODY ELSE PAY CASH" if there is to be such a motto at all.

[newyawker99]

5. Hi myopic4141!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[mac2]

3. It;'s Unconstitutional to take away rights Bush!

[mac2]

6. I heard a WGN talk show host admit her brother is gay

and happily united for 30 years.

A woman called in to talk about the list of legal benefits married people enjoy that gay partner are denied. A legal contract just won't cover it.

For example: In the State of Illinois, say a gay partner get sick...the other partner is not allowed to keep $100.000 and $2,000/month of owned health care debt that a married partner is allowed under the law.

Tax benefits, etc. The list is longer than one would think.

I tried to get a list from ACLU but their site is so busy....as you can imagine.

You known...this "sex election" issue could back fire on the Republicans.

"Marriage" is just a word is it not? Since all unions need a government license anyway why not call them all "marrige"? Not doing so is discrimination.

If religious groups want to do another ceremony, it is their concern. My spouce and I did that because it was our choice.