# Shrub: "...marriage is between a man and a woman." **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 2, 2003, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881 "2003-07-02T22:36:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![jacksen9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ce73a5/32.png) [@jacksen9](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jacksen9)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2003, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/21 "2003-07-02T23:49:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MGibson \* > \*\*To the best of my knowledge G.W. Bush has not been a governor for quite some time and is in fact the **President** of the United States. > > Marc \*\* Thanks for getting that _straight_ . ---
**Author:** ![Tars\_Tarkas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Tars\_Tarkas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tars_Tarkas)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2003, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/22 "2003-07-02T23:51:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MGibson \* > \*\*To the best of my knowledge G.W. Bush has not been a governor for quite some time and is in fact the **President** of the United States. Calling him Governor Bush makes you appear to be just as much a jackass as all those people who type Algore, Klinton, or Shrub. > \*\* Yeah, **D the C** , call him **Unelected President Bush** like you should! ---
**Author:** ![Loopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loopus/32/15343_2.png) [@Loopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopus)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2003, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/23 "2003-07-02T23:58:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > \*\*It’s not just that he opposes gay marriage but that he apparently would support a Constitutional amendment against it if it ever becomes “necessary.” > > There’s a difference between him just saying he doesn’t like it (that’s just ordinary, fundie stupidity) and saying that it may become necessary to change the fucking US Constitution to prevent any state from ever legalizing it. \*\* Very well, I can see your point. In truth, I was surprised he didn’t show all-out support for the amendment. It actually sounds like he was attempting to be non-commital. You do, incidently, sound like an ass referring to the president as “governor.” ---
**Author:** ![milroyj](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e57/32.png) [@milroyj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/milroyj)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/24 "2003-07-03T00:08:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > **"Governor" is the only political office that GWB has ever been elected to.** Wrong. President Bush was elected on December 18, 2000 by a vote of 271-267 in the Electoral College, as per the Constitution of the United States of America. Sorry you don’t like the outcome, but you’re deliberately misstating the facts. ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/25 "2003-07-03T00:13:52Z")
> [@](#): > > No president in his (political) right mind would sign anything so controversial without needing to. As long as there are no states that legalize gay marriages then a constitutional amendment isn’t necessary. By signing it, he alienates the entire GLBT community of the United States, but appeases the radical right (which is much bigger than the GLBT community, of course, but it’s not time to write off the queers just yet, if he doesn’t have to); by not signing it - with the above qualification, of course, including the statement that he would, you know, if it were actually necessary - he manages to appease both the GLBT folks and the right. [Civics 101] Presidents don’t sign constitutional amendments. Either Congress passes them by 2/3 vote of each house followed by ratification by 3/4 of the states, or 2/3 of the state legislatures call for a constitutional convention to pass amendments which again must be ratified by 3/4 of the states. [Article V](http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html) > [@](#): > > The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress [/Civics 101] That being said, what did Shrubbie hope to accomplish with this announcement? He’s pissed of the radical right (although they’ll undoubtedly vote for him anyway) and he’s pissed of gay people and their supporters, in the name of…what? Treading a middle course? What, was Karl Rove out sick today? Did Shrubbie slip the leash and run into a reporter without his minder? ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/26 "2003-07-03T00:14:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Eve \* > **I’m pessimistic…** Don’t be. [The Cook County Board](http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0307020199jul02,1,103145.story?coll=chi-newslocal-hed) “voted overwhelmingly Tuesday to establish a domestic partnership registry where gay and lesbian couples can formally record their relationship.” It ain’t marriage yet, but they are getting closer. You’re still young. Younger than me. Way younger than Strom Thurmond. Things are happening. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/27 "2003-07-03T01:06:49Z")
> [@](#): > > You do, incidently, sound like an ass referring to the president as “governor.” You know, you may be right. I think he was appointed, not elected, but if it distracts from my larger point maybe it’s pointless to harp on. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/28 "2003-07-03T01:15:21Z")
The real people to criticize about the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy are the military leadership at the time it came about. They railed and whined and whatever else it took to let the Prez know that the military was [churchlady]special[/churchlady]. Now, the Prez couldv’e just ordered the change anyway, but then he’d have to deal with the homophobes in charge and/or the homophobes the leadership was in charge of. In other words: Choose your battles. Clinton chose his and fought what he could fight. ---
**Author:** ![SmackFu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/53a042/32.png) [@SmackFu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmackFu)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/29 "2003-07-03T01:15:54Z")
My take on the “yet” is this: there is no need for an amendment if it can be stopped by a normal law. The recent SCOTUS decision has impacts on whether that law is Constitiutional. If it isn’t, then he supports the amendment. No hedging in my view. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/30 "2003-07-03T01:19:55Z")
Sounds like an ass for referring to the man by “shrub” instead of his name, too. ---
**Author:** ![jacksen9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ce73a5/32.png) [@jacksen9](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jacksen9)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/31 "2003-07-03T01:32:12Z")
So it is ok to call someone an Ass but not Shrub or Governor? Right. ---
**Author:** ![Netbrian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/71e660/32.png) [@Netbrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Netbrian)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/32 "2003-07-03T01:35:08Z")
I more or less expected this response from President Bush. It seems that in the past year or so, homosexuality has slowly started to move to the spotlight, assisted by the Washington Senator’s quotations and the Supreme Court’s ruling on sodomy. The guy obviously doesn’t support anything whatsoever to do with homosexuality, and privately would probably like such a thing, but publically, he knows that even among socially conservative republicans, the tide probably isn’t in favor of amending the constitution over such an issue. I, for one, hope that the Democrats really push this issue. Bill Clinton tried to, but then he gave up (one of the big reasons my opinion of him has fallen quite a bit lately) and signed the reprehensible DOMA and instituted Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. I think that if they push this sort of issue, and then appear fiscally moderate, they’ll have quite a good chance. Unless it’s Liberman. Then I’ll cry. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/33 "2003-07-03T01:45:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > \*\*“Governor” is the only political office that GWB has ever been elected to. Even though he’s no longer the governor of Texas, it’s still a courtesy to refer to him by his old title. \*\* Regardless of the other reasons people have given, it’s silly to call him Governor simply because of the confusion with Gov. Jeb Bush. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/34 "2003-07-03T01:46:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Esprix \* > \*\*No president in his (political) right mind would sign _anything_ so controversial without needing to. As long as there are no states that legalize gay marriages then a constitutional amendment isn’t necessary. By signing it, he alienates the entire GLBT community of the United States, but appeases the radical right (which is much bigger than the GLBT community, of course, but it’s not time to write off the queers just yet, if he doesn’t have to); by not signing it - with the above qualification, of course, including the statement that he _would_, you know, if it were actually _necessary_ - he manages to appease both the GLBT folks and the right. > > Sadly, it’s hardly the _right_ thing to do, but it is - most assuredly - the most _politically expedient and smart_ thing to do. > > Politics make me sad. ☹ > > Esprix \*\* I think you nailed it. The funny thing though is that Bush is in a unique position. The fundies love him and the right wing loves him and the military loves him. He is a leader that has close to a fanatical following with the extreme elements of the Republican party. I also think Bush does what he thinks is right, even if it’s tough and unpopular, like Iraq. It’s wishing, but if he wanted to, he could pull this off. He does have a habit of taking on the tough problems (whether you like the results or not, he doesn’t flinch.) Convince him that it’s the right thing, and maybe he’ll take the opportunity to give some meat to the rather thin corpus of the compassionate conservative platform he campaigned on. He’s for the drug bill, why not this? He could say: "I have strong religious convictions. Those convictions tell me that same sex sexual relations are wrong. As the President of the United States I cannot put my religious convictions before the freedom and equality of the citizens of this country that I promised to help upheld. There is a famous aphorism “I don’t like what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.” Same sex marriage is the same. I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also believe for freedom and equality for all citizens of this country. That belief must always come first. We cannot allow the government to place personal beleifs before the freedoms of its citizens. We cannot allow the government of this country to impinge upon the legitimate freedom of it’s citizens. I have with me… ::Here he could do his patented shctick and produce two super acceptable upstanding gay men who are candidates for sainthood and talk about how their freedoms are being withheld. for a minute. They stand up and smile.:: Freedom means freedom and equality for everybody. Because of this, I am signing executive order 69, formally recognizing samesex marriages as fully equal under law to tradittional marriages. Thank you and God Bless America." Never happen. I know. But I beleive if you could convince him that it was right (yeah, I know,) he’d do it. Email campaign, anyone? ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/35 "2003-07-03T01:47:27Z")
Esprix: Oh, and thanks for not taking the easy and free cheapshot at Bush, conservatives and Republicans in general. ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/36 "2003-07-03T02:01:05Z")
Well, I’ll be dipped in shit. I got into the Way-Back Machine and popped out on September 21, 1996, when President Clinton _did in fact_ sign H.R. 3396, the Defense of Marriage Act, into law. It’s public domain and short enough to be reprinted here in full: > [@](#): > > –H.R.3396– > > H.R.3396 > One Hundred Fourth Congress > > of the > > United States of America > > AT THE SECOND SESSION > Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, > > the third day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-six > > An Act > > To define and protect the institution of marriage. > Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, > > SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. > > This Act may be cited as the `Defense of Marriage Act’. > > SEC. 2. POWERS RESERVED TO THE STATES. > > (a) IN GENERAL- Chapter 115 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding after section 1738B the following: > > `Sec. 1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect thereof > > `No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.’. > > (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 115 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 1738B the following new item: > > `1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect thereof.’. > > SEC. 3. DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE. > > (a) IN GENERAL- Chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: > > `Sec. 7. Definition of `marriage’ and `spouse’ > > `In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word `marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word `spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.’. > > (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 6 the following new item: > > `7. Definition of `marriage’ and `spouse’.’. > Speaker of the House of Representatives. > > Vice President of the United States and > > President of the Senate. > > END Allow me to send a clear message back in time: President Clinton, you are an _asshole_ for obviously triangulating on that issue just prior to your re-election. No apologizing; no hand-waving. That was a scummy move by a President who I normally remember as a wily fellow who could usually find a way to do the right thing no matter what the rads threw at him. In this instance, I’ve been proven horribly wrong. Screw you, Bill. Oh, yeah, and this should go without saying: you’re still an asshole, too, Shrub. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/37 "2003-07-03T02:12:18Z")
> [@](#): > > Wrong. President Bush was elected on December 18, 2000 by a vote of 271-267 in the Electoral College, as per the Constitution of the United States of America. Closer than that, actually. It was a 5-4 vote of the Supreme Court that sent the neccesary Bush Electors to the College ---
**Author:** ![Blonde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3be4f8/32.png) [@Blonde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blonde)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/38 "2003-07-03T02:20:42Z")
And a damn close vote at that! But, we better get used to him - unless there’s Democrat candidates lurking in the shadows that we’re not aware of, he’s going to be signing on for four more years. Like it or not. ---
**Author:** ![syncrolecyne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f08c70/32.png) [@syncrolecyne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/syncrolecyne)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/39 "2003-07-03T03:32:05Z")
Perhaps I am wrong, but don’t even the enlightened places which allow a legally recognized same-sex relationship avoid the “m” word and use terms like “civil union” or “partnership”. Perhaps this is to make the idea somewhat more palatable to the mainstream. While Bush made a rather politically calculated (ass covering) statement, I can just scratch my head at any attempt to paint the idea that “marriage is between a man and a woman” as inordinately hateful. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881/40 "2003-07-03T04:50:20Z")
Revtim: It’s a falsehood to say that Bush was not elected to the presidency. That you do not understand the Electoral College system does not mean that the man wasn’t elected. Give it a rest. Now, if you really do understand that system and still purport that the man wasn’t elected to the presidency, then you’re really propogating a falsehood. jacksen: Why, yes, it actually is okay especially when I describe the behaviour. The guy’s name is Bush. To use the term “Shrub” as though it’s his name is derogatory. I describe what the behaviour makes the person using such a behaviour look like. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrub-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman/185881.md?page=3)