Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who recently sent fund raising party invitations shaped like a cowboy's crotch and that only opened after one undid the cowboy's belt, said that a vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment could happen as soon as June 5.
Click on the following links to send a message to your senators telling them that if they vote for the measure, they will be on the wrong side of history.
The ACLU.
The Human Rights Campaign.
This post will remain at top until June 10 or the vote is taken, whichever happens first.
29 comments:
Frist is having his own little Broke-Bank Mounting?
(I realize that, coincidentally, I'm feeding "Frist!"ing fever...sorry)
Let's see...(in my best Stephen Colbert voice)
OK, let's do them one better! I think there should be another marriage amendment that requires local officials to meet with betrothed heterosexual couples to ensure that they represent American family values before they're allowed to get married. My gosh, if the couple has had sex before marriage or cheated on one another, I think they should be prevented from getting married and having children. It sends the wrong message to our young people!
That is all.
Carl, It's a feeding Fristing frenzy!
That's pretty good, doc!
And don't forget -- Colbert's against driver's licences for gays, too!
I already did that, and Frist really needs to learn how to mind his own business.
Maybe we should just ban marriage altogether. Yeah, that's the ticket.
Uh... Fantod, do you realize your post is looking into the future... Sat. June 10, 2006...
You have awesome future powers! :)
Thanks, El -- I purposely put that date on the post so it would remain at the top of the page until then (presumably the vote will have been taken by that Saturday and I'll change the date if it occurs sooner).
Hasn’t Frist been mauled to death by bears yet?
Hasn’t Frist been mauled to death by bears yet?
Only after Hammy is done wrasslin' them!
Thanks for the blurb about the invitations. We need some humor.
And thanks for doing this with your blog as well. *hug*
Well, there ya have it!
:)
But still, your powers of foresight are remarkable!
someone (lincoln? little help here?) said (to the best of my memory), "an amendment that prohibits is, by definition, unconstitutional."
amendments are supposed to guarantee our rights, not prohibit them.
KEvron
What do you expect. Lincoln was gay.
Lincoln was a Log Cabin Republican??!
Emphasis on the log.
Republicans love to debate this. Really seems to mix them up even more than normal.
http://www.salon.com/books/it/1999/04/30/lincoln/
Lincoln was a Log Cabin Republican??!
eyedoc, I'm not sure if you're being facetious or not...
Log Cabin Republicans chose the name in honor of Lincoln. So, in essence, he was the original Log Cabin Republican.
Yes, my point exactly! :)
Darn my inability to read your multi-layered humor!
:-)
Local story: Kentucky passed a marriage amendment last year. The churches campaigned for it, my in-laws all voted for it because the church told them to. The amendment covers all unmarried couples, therefore negating the common-law marriage statutes. Recently, an uncle died, leaving his common-law wife of 40 years and four children. Thanks to the amendment, she has NO rights to his estate, and is at the mercy of her children. NOW they regret voting for it.
Wow, Miss C. How horrible for the spouse and children. It's very interesting, too, because the proponents of such laws are always claiming that common law partnerships aren't affected. Thanks for sharing this glaring example of how wrong they really are.
Marriage is forced into our culture. I would guess that common law partnerships are not that.. common. People wont care, esp. those in the church. Many of which.. I would guess will be married by the time they graduate high school.
Honestly, I dread the day when I'm forced into marriage. Mostly for the subscription into a device that features a long sad history of oppression. Listening to guys like Michael Farris who think the male is the head of the household makes me puke. Its 2000-fucking-Six, get with the program. I dont want subversive rituals forced on me by my government.
Parklife,
I think I understand what you're saying. Red Tory has made the point before that government really should get out of the "marriage" business altogether.
My support of gay marriage really is more a concern with equal protection under the law.
Signed sealed and delivered! Thank you for the link...
Peace.
Thank you, poetryman!
I still maintain what I've maintained from day one on the same sex marriage issue:
They ought to suffer like the rest of us.
Thank you, Carl!
I think.
Hey, don't mention it! After all, why should you guys have all the fun and none of the responsibility???
:-)
Fantod, it looks like the good guys might have won one...
Yup. Seems this round is over.
Post a Comment