Snowjob

Log Out | Lost Password? | Topics | Search | Who's Online Contact | Register | My Profile | SO home | MOL home

Thread Originator Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post   Closed: New threads not accepted on this page

Author Message   themp Supporter Username: Themp Post Number: 2989 Registered: 12-2001 Posted on Monday, June 5, 2006 - 2:48 pm:        MR. SNOW: Don't know. I mean, I don't think there -- look, in many ways, again, the debate is hot right -- the question is, will you be asking about it in five weeks? And the answer is probably no. Quite often a president will make statements -- and we went through this ripeness criterion the other day -- when it is in fact in the public eye and there is action that may be imminent or pending. And that is the time one would expect a president to speak out on them. Q You mentioned civil rights. Are you comparing this to various civil rights measures which have come to the Congress over the years? MR. SNOW: Not -- well, these -- it -- Q Is this a civil right? MR. SNOW: Marriage? It actually -- what we're really talking about here is an attempt to try to maintain the traditional meaning of an institution that has maintained one meeting for -- meaning for a period of centuries. And furthermore -- Q And you would equate that with civil rights? MR. SNOW: No, I'm just saying that I think -- well, I don't know. How do you define civil rights? Q It's not up to me. Up to you. MR. SNOW: Okay. Well, no, it's your question. So I -- if I -- Q (Chuckles.) MR. SNOW: I need to get a more precise definition. Q Can you stand there and say with a straight face that there is not a political dimension to this? MR. SNOW: Of course there's a political dimension to it. There's going to be a Senate vote on it, for heaven sakes. You have -- there's naturally -- there are political dimensions on both sides. It's -- this is an issue -- and we talked about this this morning -- that I think is of keen interest to a lot of people. And one of the interesting aspects is that there -- it's still -- the amendment still permits states to consider arrangements and institutions for same-sex couples that would not be called marriage. But the president feels strongly that marriage as an institution has a fixed means that ought to be honored in American law. David? Q In January of 2005 the president was asked about his support for this, and he said: Well, there's kind of a mind-set in the Senate right now that it's unnecessary to push for this amendment, because there is something -- a law that's been passed, the Defense of Marriage Act, and that's frankly good enough. MR. SNOW: Yeah. Q So what's changed? MR. SNOW: The Defense of Marriage Act now also is itself subject to legal challenge in a number of places, and that changes the dynamics a bit. And the question also ought to be asked of the Senate, because the dynamics apparently have changed in the Senate, in the sense that the leadership has seen fit to bring this up for a vote. Q In an election year, and of course the last time this came up for a vote was in 2004, another election year. MR. SNOW: Yeah. Again, I'm not sure that this is a big driver, to tell you the truth, of voters. This is an issue that is of concern, that the president is making his views known on. But you know, I think we ought to be clear that the president is speaking out about a piece of legislation because he believes in it.