Bush press secretary says gay marriage amendment civil rights measure; Stumbles when asked to define

Bush press secretary says gay marriage amendment civil rights measure; Stumbles when asked to define civil rights

At the White House press briefing today, Bush press secretary Tony Snow signaled that Bush considers an amendment barring same-sex marriage a "civil rights" matter, then stumbled when asked to define civil rights...

See the full transcript and video link...

Bush's ability to pick one bozo after another is truly a gift!

I thought you already had the Civil Rights Movement in America during the 60's for everyone, or did that just apply to everyone but gays?

Why is your government so hell bent to exterminate the gays? Why are they so threatened by gays? Could it be the "You make fun of her because you like her" syndrome?

Yumi, the term "civil rights" applies to equal rights of black people in the US. The term "feminism" applies to the equal rights of women in the US. The term "gay rights" applies to the equal rights of gay people in the US.

As soon as one group gets equal rights, another seems to be there to take its place.

As regards your question about this government? I really have no idea. THey claim something about how gays are ruining the family structure or some such rot, but never can stay in a discussion long enough to make any sense to me.

I'm sure there are some people on ATS that know. Hopefully, they'll join in.

Loam, it IS a civil rights matter. Snow let that slip out. Marriage is a civil right and should be afforded to ALL people. Good one!

Which in the White House, is misconstrue as being bright. Nobody Ever Said Tony Snow Was Bright. Just Glib. Geo W cannot have a person in the WH who is obviously smarter than he is. Which puts severe limits on potential employees. Oh, I hear Tony Snow is paid $180,000 to front for the Prez? Assuming that is a substantial pay cur from FOX the liars network, what’s his game? Snow’s that is? Is Rupert Murdoch paying “under the table” to get his man inside the WH?





[edit on 6/6/2006 by donwhite]

it is a civil rights ammendment....

it does squash a group of people's civil rights, so at least it has something to do with civil rights

I never can get my head around the various stances these people take.
It seems to be distilling down to a crazy notion that.....

......for some reason my marriage to the woman I love is conditional in some way to what is happening with gay people and that we might not have done what some consider to be such a socially beneficial thing (apparantly) if the same rights were afforded to gay people.

HTF does that work?!

I just don't see why my sexual preferences entitle me to more or less 'civil rights' than anyone elses.
Sorry but I just don't.
It's plain wrong and stupid IMO.....and whats more so totally unnecessary.

......and attempting to use this issue in such a crassly obvious gambit for party political gain near election time is pure wickedness as far as I'm concerned.
But then again it's only what seems to be typical in right-wing American politics these days.
(see Coulter's latest bashing the widows stunt)

[edit on 7-6-2006 by sminkeypinkey]