Elimaan: So what Sam quoted
Elimaan: was the actual amendment proposed
Elimaan: but Bush's speech
Elimaan: on the other hand says
Elimaan: The amendment should fully protect marriage, while leaving the state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage.
Elimaan: which is leaving the door open for civil unions with equal rights, which is why Kerry agreed with him
Elimaan: btw, what Kerry did was a politically smart move, which was to say that he would vote no for a constitutional amendment but vote yes for a state amendment for Mass. with the same wording
Elimaan: which means he looks like he's bashing Bush while simultaneously garnering votes

Flutekw: ah, I see. but it still doesn't do anything about requiring states to accept the unions created in other states. Wouldn't that be a serious problem, if a union was created in a liberal state, then the couple moved somewhere like TX? It seems like it'd cause huge headaches if there are substantially different standards developed by each state/county

Elimaan: you can argue about that problem separately :-) my point was to counter your original point :-)
Elimaan: that is, his speech was actually more middle-of-the-road than it appears

Elimaan: i think a lot of people say "how could bush say that, i won't vote for him' but not realize that Kerry said the exact same thing
------
Ok, Eli, you win on that one. And I grant that my cultural institution remarks don't have much bearing on this situation... but I still think there are going to be plenty of headaches if different places develop their own standards for civil unions.