Bush 'Troubled' by Gay Marriage Issue
By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Wednesday he was troubled by gay weddings in San Francisco and by legal decisions in Massachusetts that could clear the way for same-sex marriage. He declined to say whether he was close to backing a constitutional ban.
"I have watched carefully what's happening in San Francisco, where licenses were being issued, even though the law states otherwise," Bush said. "I have consistently stated that I'll support law to protect marriage between a man and a woman. Obviously these events are influencing my decision."
He didn't answer directly when asked whether he is any closer to endorsing a constitutional ban on same-sex marriages, as conservative groups say the White House has assured them Bush will do.
"I strongly believe marriage should be defined as between a man and a woman," Bush said during an Oval Office session with Tunisian President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. "I am troubled by activist judges who are defining marriage."
"People need to be involved in this decision," Bush said. "Marriage ought to be defined by the people not by the courts. And I'm watching it carefully."
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush recognized that gay marriage is a divisive topic. But, he said, "This is an issue where he believes it is important for people to stand up on principle."
Gay and lesbian couples from Europe and more than 20 states have lined up outside the ornate San Francisco City Hall since city officials decided to begin marrying same-sex couples six days ago. City officials said 172 couples were married Tuesday, a pace that would bring the total number who have taken vows promising to be "spouses for life" to over 3,000 by Friday.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently ruled that it is unconstitutional to bar gay couples from marriage. Under the decision, the nation's first legally sanctioned gay marriages are scheduled to begin in mid-May.
Lawmakers are proposing a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as a union between one man and one woman, and the Legislature resumes its deliberations of amendments on March 11.
----------------------------------------------
Does that mean that if a state referendum passed allowing gays to marry that President Bush would support it. After all, he says "marriage ought to be defined by the people". Or is only special people that get to define?
By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Wednesday he was troubled by gay weddings in San Francisco and by legal decisions in Massachusetts that could clear the way for same-sex marriage. He declined to say whether he was close to backing a constitutional ban.
"I have watched carefully what's happening in San Francisco, where licenses were being issued, even though the law states otherwise," Bush said. "I have consistently stated that I'll support law to protect marriage between a man and a woman. Obviously these events are influencing my decision."
He didn't answer directly when asked whether he is any closer to endorsing a constitutional ban on same-sex marriages, as conservative groups say the White House has assured them Bush will do.
"I strongly believe marriage should be defined as between a man and a woman," Bush said during an Oval Office session with Tunisian President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. "I am troubled by activist judges who are defining marriage."
"People need to be involved in this decision," Bush said. "Marriage ought to be defined by the people not by the courts. And I'm watching it carefully."
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush recognized that gay marriage is a divisive topic. But, he said, "This is an issue where he believes it is important for people to stand up on principle."
Gay and lesbian couples from Europe and more than 20 states have lined up outside the ornate San Francisco City Hall since city officials decided to begin marrying same-sex couples six days ago. City officials said 172 couples were married Tuesday, a pace that would bring the total number who have taken vows promising to be "spouses for life" to over 3,000 by Friday.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently ruled that it is unconstitutional to bar gay couples from marriage. Under the decision, the nation's first legally sanctioned gay marriages are scheduled to begin in mid-May.
Lawmakers are proposing a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as a union between one man and one woman, and the Legislature resumes its deliberations of amendments on March 11.
----------------------------------------------
Does that mean that if a state referendum passed allowing gays to marry that President Bush would support it. After all, he says "marriage ought to be defined by the people". Or is only special people that get to define?
