| THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016). |
|---|
By the President of the United States of America A Proclamation Marriage is a sacred institution, and its protection is essential to the continued strength of our society. Marriage Protection Week provides an opportunity to focus our efforts on preserving the sanctity of marriage and on building strong and healthy marriages in America. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman, and my Administration is working to support the institution of marriage by helping couples build successful marriages and be good parents. To encourage marriage and promote the well-being of children, I have proposed a healthy marriage initiative to help couples develop the skills and knowledge to form and sustain healthy marriages. Research has shown that, on average, children raised in households headed by married parents fare better than children who grow up in other family structures. Through education and counseling programs, faith-based, community, and government organizations promote healthy marriages and a better quality of life for children. By supporting responsible child-rearing and strong families, my Administration is seeking to ensure that every child can grow up in a safe and loving home. We are also working to make sure that the Federal Government does not penalize marriage. My tax relief package eliminated the marriage penalty. And as part of the welfare reform package I have proposed, we will do away with the rules that have made it more difficult for married couples to move out of poverty. We must support the institution of marriage and help parents build stronger families. And we must continue our work to create a compassionate, welcoming society, where all people are treated with dignity and respect. During Marriage Protection Week, I call on all Americans to join me in expressing support for the institution of marriage with all its benefits to our people, our culture, and our society. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim the week of October 12 through October 18, 2003, as Marriage Protection Week. I call upon the people of the United States to observe this week with appropriate programs, activities, and ceremonies. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this third day of October, in the year of our Lord two thousand three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty-eighth. GEORGE W. BUSH |
"We must support the institution of marriage and help parents build stronger families. And we must continue our work to create a compassionate, welcoming society, where all people are treated with dignity and respect." Except of course for all the gay and lesbian couples. No compassion, dignity or respect for them. What a hypocrite. what an embarrasment. |
that would go a long way to preserve the sanctitiy of my marriage. i mean , not like, in a very very literal sense, but you know, it wouldnt hurt. |
The fed gov has no business stepping in on this. What gives ANY government the right to define marriage? Goddammit. |
|
I think we should eliminate the LEGAL category of marriage entirely and acknolwedge the broad range of family-types as they exist already. Why should we favor any pairings of people when many families do not and will never reflect any narrowly defined ideal? I am not opposed to establishing parameters when it comes to distributing resources. I don't think just anyone can and should be considered a domestic partner, just because they live together. And I don't think that any partnership situation should trump the rights of parents who do not live with their children. However, if (for example) a grandmother is living with her son/daughter and helping to raise his/her children shouldn't she be accorded rights so long as she has established herself responsible and able to care for her grandchildren? If two single mothers/fathers (whether they are siblings or friends) want to buy a house and commit to raising their children together, I don't see why they should be "married" to enjoy the benefits that others get and that they will need to make the most of their living situation. As long as these situations do not infringe on the rights of other parties (parents who do not have custody, for example) then why shouldn't they be acknowledged? The fact is, despite all the "what if's" (people dying, wanting to get married, etc.) these family structures exist already, all I am suggesting is that they not be excluded as we try to construct a legal definition of what counts as family. It sounds like a logistical nightmare, but the fact remains that families that fall outside of the ideal are the reality and social policy should acknowledge that. |
by any pairings, I meant "married" pairings, be they homo or hetero. My arguement does favor "pairings" but just opens up what constitutes a pair. |
I'll shut up now. |
but it's also a bunch of shit that just distracts a lot of people from many other things no one should be punished for being, or not-being married, by taxes or whatever [whatever he does right or wrong, bush is an asshole. IT'S A SMALL AND PETTY FUCKING WORLD SOMETIMES. grrr] |
Perhaps a simple solution would be to issue a recognition of a BOND. That is, two people (we'll deal with polygamy/polyandry later) who wish to be recognized legally as a committed pair for the legal benefits. Leave all issues except the number of people and age of consent out of it. Anyway, that's what I think about it. |
|
i just stared for too long at the hypnotoad. |
|
This whole subject is not covered anywhere by the US Constitution. Marriage is between 2 people and elegibility should be determined by the person officiating the ceremony. Jesus, we really are transforming from a Constitutional Republic to a Moralistic Social Democracy. |
|
|
|
All hail Hypnotoad! |