![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
March 2, 2004
False Pretenses of Bush's Gay Marriage ReversalIn announcing his support for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage last week, President Bush said he was reversing his previous position on the issue because various states and courts had forced him to act. He cited recent actions to legalize gay marriage in Massachusetts, New Mexico and San Francisco as the specific impetuses for his action. However, according to the president's closest congressional ally on the gay marriage issue, this explanation is false -- the president made his decision months ago and well before actions by the states and courts. Specifically, the Denver Rocky Mountain News reports that, while "the White House said President Bush made his decision only after officials in San Francisco and New Mexico presided over same-sex marriages,"1 Bush actually "pledged to Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) that he would support her proposed constitutional amendment prohibiting gay marriage three months before" his public announcement last week2. The revelation is corroborated by the San Francisco Chronicle, which noted almost three months before last week's announcement that "the White House indicated Bush is considering" supporting the constitutional amendment. By contrast, the Massachusetts court ruled on February 6th4, San Francisco moved on February 11th5, and New Mexico acted on February 20th6. While the new revelations show that the president's announcement was made under false pretenses, an analysis of the president and Vice President's past statements show that they were also misleading America four years ago in presenting a wholly different position on the gay marriage issue. On February 15, 2000, Bush said, "The state[s] can do what they want to"7 on issues surrounding gay marriage, and he reiterated this position on May 2, 2000, saying it is "going to be up for cities and states to make those decisions."8 Similarly, Vice President Cheney said on October 5, 2000, "I think the fact of the matter, of course, is [same-sex marriage] is regulated by the states. I think different states are likely to come to different conclusions and that's appropriate. I don't think there should necessarily be a federal policy in this area."9 Sources:
Misleader Archive |