Matrimony may be sacred and/or legal. Only churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, etc., can sanctify matrimony. If they consider a marriage sacred then it doesn't matter whether or not the state recognizes it as legal, if, (big IF) all citizens have equal rights.

The state can't sanctify anything; it can only legalize. Religious organizations can recognize legal marriages as sacred or not as they choose but they can't tell the state which marriages to legalize. It's called "separation of church and state."

No surprises here. It's another example of people requiring better behavior of others than they do themselves. Remember Newt Gingrich, Tim DeLay and Dick Cheney.

You can't be pardoned unless you're guilty, so let's see how many "plead guilty." Will Baghdad Bush be one of them?

This is a problem going back to Nixon. The press didn't like Nixon, for good reasons, but other than leaving the White House in disgrace, Nixon didn't pay for illegally spying on Americans and he hardened Republicans to accept greater crimes by Reagan and the Bushes. The International World Court found Reagan and his administration guilty of international terrorism, but how many people are even aware of that today? We are fighting a "war" laughably called "war on terror" by attacking two countries that didn't attack us while largely ignoring a terrorist group that did attack us. But what Reagan cynically called "a city on a hill" was actually a rogue nation vetoing a resolution of the UN Security Council calling on all nations to obey international law. We had to withdraw from the world court and veto the resolution because it was aimed at the scofflaw US. How many times did the media mention that when discussing the "war on terror"? How many times did they mention members of the present Bush administration who were part of our international terrorism, such as Rumsfeld, Elliot Abrams, Robert Gates

Ronald Reagan subverted the Constitution to raise a private army supported by private funds to fight an illegal, genocidal war in Central America. Reagan and Bush signed illegal quid-pro-quo documents to support their private war. As the Kerry Committee report revealed, the Reagan administration used drug smugglers to smuggle guns into Central America and defended the smugglers when they were caught smuggling drugs into the US.

The International Criminal Court rightly found the US guilt of international terrorism. Yet, public schools, even government buildings, are named after Reagan and he died outside of prison. Did that deter criminal acts by members of the George W. Bush administration? Many of those in the present administration were criminals in the Reagan administration.

The questions the humorously called "major" media never ask or answer is: Do citizens of Gaza or the West Bank have a right to protect and defend their homes, their families, their land? Why do "Christians" such as John Hagee, Franklin Graham, Pat Robertson, etc. not defend Palestinian Christians the way they do "persecuted" American Christians?

Disclosure: I have given money to John Hagee and encouraged others to do so to help repatriate Palestinian Christians who have been driven from their homes.

Either we have a Constitution or we don't. Either oaths of office mean something or they don't. The executive branch seems to have difficulty with both points so we will have to depend on the the legislative branch .

One of the things I admired about Republicans was that congressional Republican leaders went to the White House to tell Nixon he had to resign or he would be impeached. No hint that their oaths of office would fall on the sword to defend Nixon's crimes. (Disclosure: I voted for Nixon every time he was on the ballot) However, when Reagan was found guilty of greater crimes, Republicans threw their honor in the garbage to stonewall the truth. The same thing happened with George W. Bush. Defend the criminal, not the Constitution. Oaths and honor are irrelevant.

I thought after the dishonor and criminality of the Reagan administration, Republicans would change the name of the party to disown their dishonorable conduct and recover their integrity. They chose not to do so but instead named public buildings after a man found guilty of terrorism by the International Criminal Court. How do you explain that to your grandchildren?

Please tell us who the congresswoman was who tried to link the CIA with cocaine addiction by young black Americans. The Kerry subcommittee investigating guns and drugs smuggling issued a report in 1989 that became public in 1998. I suggest The Wingnut read it. It's available at the National Security Archive at George Washington University (nsarchive.org). It details support by the Reagan administration of known drug smugglers, including those tried in US Courts, and obstruction of justice by the Reagan administration trying to cover up the activity. This was part of the privately financed terror wars in Central America for which the US was found guilty of international terrorism by the World Court.