From the president's State of the Union address:
A strong America must also value the institution of marriage. I believe we should respect individuals as we take a principled stand for one of the most fundamental, enduring institutions of our civilization. Congress has already taken a stand on this issue by passing the Defense of Marriage Act, signed in 1996 by President Clinton. That statute protects marriage under Federal law as the union of a man and a woman, and declares that one state may not redefine marriage for other states.
Activist judges, however, have begun redefining marriage by court order, without regard for the will of the people and their elected representatives. On an issue of such great consequence, the people's voice must be heard. If judges insist on forcing their arbitrary will upon the people, the only alternative left to the people would be the constitutional process. Our nation must defend the sanctity of marriage.
The outcome of this debate is important -- and so is the way we conduct it. The same moral tradition that defines marriage also teaches that each individual has dignity and value in God's sight.
Bush does not endorse a specific constitutional amendment, but
"if judges" mandate same-sex marriage, he would favor supporting
traditional marriage through the "constitutional process." Still,
that won't be enough to stop criticism from the right. Already, a
press release has been issued from the Family Research Council's
Tony Perkins, who declares:
Sixty-four days ago the Massachusetts State Supreme Court tossed a cultural time bomb into the public square when they mandated the Legislature to create homosexual marriages. Disappointingly, this evening in his State of the Union address, President Bush promised to help the families of America -- after the bomb goes off and the damage is done. Now is the time, before the Court of Massachusetts imposes same sex marriage on America, to protect the sacred and irreplaceable institution of marriage.
The President should immediately call upon Congress to pass an amendment this year to the Constitution codifying into law what history and nature has taught us -- marriage is between a man and a woman.
The families of America have consistently supported the President on both his foreign and domestic policies. They have stood with him in his efforts of homeland security and now they want the President to focus on the security of the American home by protecting the institution of marriage.
But Bush has not done so, at least not to the extent the
religious right's leaders are demanding. Of course, he's now opened
the way to discussing the "constitutional process," which could
jeopardize our rights to equality under the law. He should be
called to account for that, although I wish there'd be some
acknowledgement by gay leaders that his position is far more
ambiguous than the religious right expected from their
man.