Pelosi Against Marriage Amendment

[HagiaSophia]

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said Sunday that a proposed constitutional amendment limiting marriage to heterosexual couples would be “an act of discrimination” against gays.

Noting that some Republicans in Congress joined Democrats in opposing a federal ban on gay marriage, Pelosi told “Fox News Sunday”: “There were many Republicans who did not want to taint the Constitution with an act of discrimination. Many Republicans fell into that category.”

newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/12/5/134332.shtml

 

[TheKid]

Now that the election is over the bishops are going to go back in their comfy shell and hope and pretend all these anti life catholic politicians just go away. This issue will not be mentioned by the bishops until we are within 3 or 4 weeks of the 2006 elections

 

[Lisa_N]

HagiaSophia:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said Sunday that a proposed constitutional amendment limiting marriage to heterosexual couples would be “an act of discrimination” against gays.

Noting that some Republicans in Congress joined Democrats in opposing a federal ban on gay marriage, Pelosi told “Fox News Sunday”: “There were many Republicans who did not want to taint the Constitution with an act of discrimination. Many Republicans fell into that category.”

newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/12/5/134332.shtml

Well no surprise on that one. Nancy Pelosi is as predictable as the sun rising in the east.

Lisa N

 

[HagiaSophia]

Now that the election is over the bishops are going to go back in their comfy shell and hope and pretend all these anti life catholic politicians just go away. This issue will not be mentioned by the bishops until we are within 3 or 4 weeks of the 2006 elections

Actually I think if the laity don’t bring it up, the bishops would rather it “just went away” all together.

 

[Jay74]

HagiaSophia:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said Sunday that a proposed constitutional amendment limiting marriage to heterosexual couples would be “an act of discrimination” against gays.

Noting that some Republicans in Congress joined Democrats in opposing a federal ban on gay marriage, Pelosi told “Fox News Sunday”: “There were many Republicans who did not want to taint the Constitution with an act of discrimination. Many Republicans fell into that category.”

newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/12/5/134332.shtml

Calling it an act of discrimination is a cop out. Although marriage shouldn’t have to be defined in the constitution, a constitutional amendment defining marriage has become necessary only because activist liberal judges, by taking that role upon themselves, have rendered it impossible for American society to do so.

I find it ironic that Ms Pelosi and her ideological allies are delighted to have 5 activist judges redefine the constitution to create a “right” to an abortion, but find allowing 2/3 of the legislature and 3/4 of the states to define marriage offensive.

 

[Bob_Baran]

It is totally unbelievable to me that the whole world has to define marriage! What was understood to be natural in society from the beginning of the human race is now being shouted from a minority that they are being discriminated against because humankind believes that a conjugal relationship is between a male and female. If a person who has a conscience would just think about this incongruity one can only conclude that it is not only bizarre, but is also unnatural.
Lord, have mercy on us!

 

[monica_fan]

I understand your frustration with the Bishops and clergy. There are some very good Bishops that are speaking out but they are in the minority. Several months ago a good friend told her Pastor that he needs to start preaching against abortion. He told her that he couldn’t then because it would be seen as too political during the elections. She replied by telling him that if he had been preaching against abortion throughout the years, he wouldn’t have been seen as “too political” I hope that the clergy have learned from this and will defend marriage and other moral issues in and out of season. It’s so very important.

Now that the election is over the bishops are going to go back in their comfy shell and hope and pretend all these anti life catholic politicians just go away. This issue will not be mentioned by the bishops until we are within 3 or 4 weeks of the 2006 elections

 

[Brad]

Jay74:

I find it ironic that Ms Pelosi and her ideological allies are delighted to have 5 activist judges redefine the constitution to create a “right” to an abortion, but find allowing 2/3 of the legislature and 3/4 of the states to define marriage offensive.

Ironic but not unexpected. From her perspective, 3/4 of the country is much less enlightened that herself. In fact, many of us are so incompetent, we still believe that the Bible is true.