I don’t know about you, but I find it offensive to see The Constitution- a document meant to protect people’s rights- used to take away rights of groups of people. Thank god that Congress has shot this down. Hopefully they will continue to do so for years to come.

Speaking of which. . .
Changing of subject, but similar civil rights region,

Time for your - Morning Cup of Piss
Following is the complete text of Bush’s radio address June 3:

“Good morning. Next week, the United States Senate will begin debate
on a constitutional amendment that defines marriage in the United
States as the union of a man and woman. On Monday, I will meet with a
coalition of community leaders, constitutional scholars, family and
civic organizations, and religious leaders. They’re Republicans,
Democrats, and independents who’ve come together to support this
amendment. Today, I want to explain why I support the Marriage
Protection Amendment, and why I’m urging Congress to pass it and send
it to the states for ratification.

“Marriage is the most enduring and important human institution,
honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith.
Ages of experience have taught us that the commitment of a husband and
a wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of
children and the stability of society. Marriage cannot be cut off from
its cultural, religious, and natural roots without weakening this good
influence on society. Government, by recognizing and protecting
marriage, serves the interests of all.

“In our free society, people have the right to choose how they live
their lives. And in a free society, decisions about such a fundamental
social institution as marriage should be made by the people — not by
the courts. The American people have spoken clearly on this issue,
both through their representatives and at the ballot box. In 1996,
Congress approved the Defense of Marriage Act by overwhelming
bipartisan majorities in both the House and Senate, and President
Clinton signed it into law. And since then, voters in 19 states have
approved amendments to their state constitutions that protect the
traditional definition of marriage. And today, 45 of the 50 states
have either a state constitutional amendment or statute defining
marriage as the union of a man and a woman. These amendments and laws
express a broad consensus in our country for protecting the
institution of marriage.

“Unfortunately, activist judges and some local officials have made an
aggressive attempt to redefine marriage in recent years. Since 2004,
state courts in Washington, California, Maryland, and New York have
overturned laws protecting marriage in those states. And in Nebraska,
a federal judge overturned a state constitutional amendment banning
same-sex marriage.

“These court decisions could have an impact on our whole Nation. The
Defense of Marriage Act declares that no state is required to accept
another state’s definition of marriage. If that act is overturned by
activist courts, then marriages recognized in one city or state might
have to be recognized as marriages everywhere else. That would mean
that every state would have to recognize marriages redefined by judges
in Massachusetts or local officials in San Francisco, no matter what
their own laws or state constitutions say. This national question
requires a national solution, and on an issue of such profound
importance, that solution should come from the people, not the courts.

“An amendment to the Constitution is necessary because activist courts
have left our Nation with no other choice. The constitutional
amendment that the Senate will consider next week would fully protect
marriage from being redefined, while leaving state legislatures free
to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than
marriage. A constitutional amendment is the most democratic solution
to this issue, because it must be approved by two-thirds of the House
and Senate and then ratified by three-fourths of the 50 state
legislatures.

“As this debate goes forward, we must remember that every American
deserves to be treated with tolerance, respect, and dignity. All of us
have a duty to conduct this discussion with civility and decency
toward one another, and all people deserve to have their voices heard.
A constitutional amendment will put a decision that is critical to
American families and American society in the hands of the American
people, which is exactly where it belongs. Democracy, not court
orders, should decide the future of marriage in America.

“Thank you for listening.”

The thing that bothers me the most about people who bitch about illegal immigrants (other than the ones who don’t make a distinction between immigration and illegal immigration) is it seems that these arguments are mainly fueled by fear. When we have a president that is saying we should put illegal immigrants in jail because this will somehow stop terrorism then I applaud the people who are running out into the streets to give Bush a big FUCK YOU!

Anyway, Chris makes good points (as a side note, why is it that whenever I type “Chris” I habitually make it “Christ”?). One thing I can’t help but being is practical. We have it better than the rest of the world. Agreed. People who can’t feed their families want better lives. Agreed. Does it make me a heartless bitch to say that they shouldn’t be able to cross the border illegally to get their little piece of the pie? I don’t think so. If everyone did it, there wouldn’t be a pie anymore. The strain would force America far down on the standard of living totem pole. That’s why it’s so frustrating to hear people talk about “immigrant rights” and “illegal immigrant rights” in the same breath. I have no problem with immigrants coming in and being a part of this country. Hell, with the exception of a few on reservations, that’s what this country is based on.
My immediate instinct is to find a middle ground. Call me a fence rider, whatever. But with all this polarization, I still think that the middle of the road is going to be where the answers lie (on most issues…don’t even get me started on reproductive rights…). So anyway, I think that we *should* beef up the border security, but instead of making all of these ridiculous rules we have no intention of enforcing, we should put the money into making more reasonable LEGAL immigration rules. Oh yeah, and knocking a big fat hole into the beaurocracy that makes it take YEARS to become legal here. I don’t think that it should be any less difficult (you should still have to take a test and have a basic idea of what this country is about, and I do think that it should be a requirement to at least know basic english, even if you choose not to speak it with your family), but it shouldn’t take as long or cost as much. That just marginalizes those who are legitimately poor trying to make a better life for themselves. I also don’t think that it’s a practical thing to allow children born to illegal immigrants into automatic citizens, but maybe that’s another story for another day. Anyway, it seems to me that those protesting in the streets, while their hearts are in the right place, are fighting the wrong fight. If they put the effort into pushing their leaders for an overhaul of immigration in general, they might get a lot more done.
As far as this: “If you truly believed in a God and the afterlife then you would devote every waking moment to pleasing him.”
Maybe. But sometimes peoples’ deities want them to keep their race pure or keep “the others” out. It’s a difficult line to draw, but what I see in the immigration issue is that it all comes down to being greedy. But then, that’s my general opinion of organized Christianity anyway, so I guess there’s a slight bias there.

Unfortunately this immigration ho-ha is nothing more than slimly politicians using the American public, legal and not, as an election tool, not touching any real solution.

It’s an election year; A very big one.
The country has severely divided on complex issues that a bill or two can’t fix. The two political parties have a lot on the line if they win the control of the house. Which right now the Republicans control by a small majority. They already control the Supreme court and the white house, where the president who is at the end of his 2nd term, therefore does not have to worry about being reelected.

Immigration is and has almost always been a hot issue. Hence, recently the controversial political statement of minute men and then of course the biggest protest ever in LA. The politicians know this and they are using the public’s interests for votes. Not that this is always a bad thing.

The Bills being proposed to fix the problem are cheap. Based on the publics ignorance and sterotypes, they don’t address the real problems, but are merely for show. . . to appeal to the right people to get the vote.
Putting troops at the boarder won’t stop people who are desperate and already
risking their life to be more creative on how they cross. But hey, don’t ya-all’ like police states.

“Guest worker”, sounds great on paper but won’t work. A main problem stopping people from becoming citizens is crazy bureaucracy mess that often takes 20 plus years, pretending they have the right papers from the 3rd world countries that they were born in. People can’t wait this long when they are starving now.

Lets not talk about the logistics of literally throwing out all of the 12 million illegals in this country.

People like simple shinny solutions and they don’t like that they are part of the problem. That is another rant, on why and how we keep these countries in poverty.

I agree with Chris that we should be helping other countries out so they can help themselves. (Then again the world can support to live even slightly close to American’s standards.) We live in a militarize country, once again, fixing things by brute force rather than finding the cause of the problem and tackling that.