But I digress.
    The point is that Bush is missing or ignoring the founding ideals in the Constitution about preventing the pulpet from dictating your personal life, as well as the equal protection clause that prevents special classes of people getting special treatment while others are blocked from the benifits being given to the few.

        What do I meen by that?
    It comes back to a previous page on this site where I ask wheather a Marrage is a religious or Civil institution.
    If it is religious then the Government has no business making any laws concerning it, but if it is Civil then the laws must applie to any pair of people that wish to share responsibility for each others well being.
    I could already suggest inequality for those who aren't married and are supporting each other, compaired to those who currently recieve the benifits of marrage laws giving tax breaks at the expence of single people living together with children or those singles who don't burden the world with children that are supported with everyones Taxes.

    So it seems to me that rather than amending the laws of the land to further exclude people from the protection of the existing laws,
we should actually remove any refrence of marrage from the current laws, leaving that institution of marrage to any religous sect who feels it a part of their teachings to oversee.
    But then replace the protections in a broad way and allow any couple of any nature who seek them to easily aquire any of the leagle protections of a joining of assets and resposibility or what is commonly known as spousal rights or power of atterny or living wills to have those protections regarlless of their religious ties, feelings or convictions, or the religious convictions of others.