Bush went to class? I thought he "imagined" history as "stuff"

i do not in any way condone Bush or this ridiculous excuse utter ridiculous plot of his but you have to admit he has some set of balls for putting this into play ;just look at it as a last effort attempt to exort his powers before he is outta there.........I pray for intelligence to enter the white house as well as someone who seeks to unite people instead of dividing.

i put up a funny picture of goerge bush on a www.myfamily.com website some friends have going on, for a caption contest. we gotten some funny responses. to sum it up, i think we need a constitutional ban on goerge bush or we need to send goerge bush to mars.

he's using the gay marriage thing as a diversionary ploy to divert attention from iraq and his poor performance as president. something to give his current run for office some focus. this is something the religious right will eat up...and give him brownie points for.

[Edited on Feb 27, 2004 5:10PM]

Next thing you know Dubya will be proposing a constitutional amendment banning the teaching of evolution in the schools.

Bush is an asshole, and it's getting ridiculous how our constitutional freedoms are being peeled away one by one.

C'mon, those monkeys won't even recognize evolution.

Bwahahahah!!! That is fucking funny!

funny how people speak of bush as if he wasn't actually just a puppet figurehead.

The gay marriage thing is just a ploy to get the Jeebus people to vote for Bush. There is fear in the White House that the far right is rejecting Dubya because of his deficits and the fact he hasn't shown quite enough commitment to them yet. This is his way of saying "Vote for me or homos will get married."

I think everyone in the White House knows that amendment doesn't have a chance in hell of getting passed. It doesn't have the votes in Congress (remember that it takes 2/3 of both houses) or in the states (it must be ratified by 3/4 of the states.) It's more useful to them if it doesn't get passed, because they can keep stirring this shit up.

If I'm the Democratic candidate, here is how I answer this: "I am opposed to this amendment because I believe the issue of who can and cannot be married should be left to the states. Let's talk about the 3 million jobs that have vanished under this President, and the $500 billion deficit we just rang up."

I agree.

Love That Dare Not Squeak Its Name
By DINITIA SMITH (NYT) 1725 words
Late Edition - Final , Section B , Page 7 , Column 4

Roy and Silo, two chinstrap penguins at the Central Park Zoo in Manhattan, are completely devoted to each other. For nearly six years now, they have been inseparable. They exhibit what in penguin parlance is called "ecstatic behavior": that is, they entwine their necks, they vocalize to each other, they have sex. Silo and Roy are, to anthropomorphize a bit, gay penguins. When offered female companionship, they have adamantly refused it. And the females aren't interested in them, either.

At one time, the two seemed so desperate to incubate an egg together that they put a rock in their nest and sat on it, keeping it warm in the folds of their abdomens, said their chief keeper, Rob Gramzay. Finally, he gave them a fertile egg that needed care to hatch. Things went perfectly. Roy and Silo sat on it for the typical 34 days until a chick, Tango, was born. For the next two and a half months they raised Tango, keeping her warm and feeding her food from their beaks until she could go out into the world on her own. Mr. Gramzay is full of praise for them.

"They did a great job," he said. He was standing inside the glassed-in penguin exhibit, where Roy and Silo had just finished lunch. Penguins usually like a swim after they eat, and Silo was in the water. Roy had finished his dip and was up on the beach.

Roy and Silo are hardly unusual. Milou and Squawk, two young males, are also beginning to exhibit courtship behavior, hanging out with each other, billing and bowing. Before them, the Central Park Zoo had Georgey and Mickey, two female Gentoo penguins who tried to incubate eggs together. And Wendell and Cass, a devoted male African penguin pair, live at the New York Aquarium in Coney Island. Indeed, scientists have found homosexual behavior throughout the animal world.

This growing body of science has been increasingly drawn into charged debates about homosexuality in American society, on subjects from gay marriage to sodomy laws, despite reluctance from experts in the field to extrapolate from animals to humans. Gay groups argue that if homosexual behavior occurs in animals, it is natural, and therefore the rights of homosexuals should be protected. On the other hand, some conservative religious groups have condemned the same practices in the past, calling them "animalistic."

But if homosexuality occurs among animals, does that necessarily mean that it is natural for humans, too? And that raises a familiar question: if homosexuality is not a choice, but a result of natural forces that cannot be controlled, can it be immoral?

The open discussion of homosexual behavior in animals is relatively new. "There has been a certain cultural shyness about admitting it," said Frans de Waal, whose 1997 book, "Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape" (University of California Press), unleashed a torrent of discussion about animal sexuality. Bonobos, apes closely related to humans, are wildly energetic sexually. Studies show that whether observed in the wild or in captivity, nearly all are bisexual, and nearly half their sexual interactions are with the same sex. Female bonobos have been observed to engage in homosexual activity almost hourly.

Before his own book, "American scientists who investigated bonobos never discussed sex at all," said Mr. de Waal, director of the Living Links Center of the Yerkes Primate Center at Emory University in Atlanta. "Or they sometimes would show two females having sex together, and would say, `The females are very affectionate.' "

Then in 1999, Bruce Bagemihl published "Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity" (St. Martin's Press), one of the first books of its kind to provide an overview of scholarly studies of same-sex behavior in animals. Mr. Bagemihl said homosexual behavior had been documented in some 450 species. (Homosexuality, he says, refers to any of these behaviors between members of the same sex: long-term bonding, sexual contact, courtship displays or the rearing of young.) Last summer the book was cited by the American Psychiatric Association and other groups in a "friend of the court" brief submitted to the Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas, a case challenging a Texas anti-sodomy law. The court struck down the law.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wanted to share this article because i thought it was really sweet and got quite a lot of enjoyment from it but at one point in the article the author makes the following point:

"But if homosexuality occurs among animals, does that necessarily mean that it is natural for humans, too? And that raises a familiar question: if homosexuality is not a choice, but a result of natural forces that cannot be controlled, can it be immoral?"

I think this is a really bad arguement to make: There are many things occuring "naturally" in nature that by most human standards would be considered immoral. For instance, i recently heard a mormon argue that mama lions will kill and eat their babies during times of starvation and hardship. I don't know how factual this is but i am sure there are many examples of animals acting in ways perfectly common to their "nature" but that we would consider immoral.

Also, let's assume that someone somehow demonstrates that people choose to be gay. Does that give them less of a right to marriage?

We should be focusing more on arguements like the one olivia brought up: that gay marriage is not harmful to societies.

He was busy at cheerleading practice at Yale.