http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorials?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsGay Marriage Editorialsen-us1514020http://www.washingtonpost.comhttp://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/hp/image/wp_web.gifhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54690-2004Sep1.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54690-2004Sep1.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMThttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37207-2004Aug26.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37207-2004Aug26.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMThttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30283-2004Aug24.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30283-2004Aug24.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMThttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3900-2004Aug15.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3900-2004Aug15.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMTnot possess such authority."]]>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A483-2004Jul20.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A483-2004Jul20.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMThttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48233-2004Jul13.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48233-2004Jul13.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMThttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24784-2004Jul2.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24784-2004Jul2.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMThttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11267-2004May8.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11267-2004May8.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMThttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28366-2004Mar26.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28366-2004Mar26.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMTI don't know how old Alison Pattillo's children are, but her protest that the March 17 "Defining Marriage" article in Kids Post was too adult for most children is in error [Free for All, March 20].]]>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9622-2004Mar19.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9622-2004Mar19.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMThttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3604-2004Feb24.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3604-2004Feb24.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMT "Today, I call upon the Congress to promptly pass and to send to the states for ratification an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of a man and woman as husband and wife."]]>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38160-2004Feb12.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38160-2004Feb12.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMThttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17475-2004Feb5.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17475-2004Feb5.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMThttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47627-2004Jan25.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47627-2004Jan25.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMTwould be the constitutional process" (emphasis added). Mr. Bush then muddied the waters further by adding his usual plea for tolerance of gays, insisting that "each individual has dignity and value in God's sight." The idea, in an election year, is not subtle. Mr. Bush wants to keep the Republican base at bay with verbal Pablum about the "sanctity of marriage" and a promise to support an amendment if this gay-marriage thing gets out of hand. But at the same time, he wants to avoid energizing Democrats and alienating centrists by actually calling for one now.]]>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63767-2003Nov19.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63767-2003Nov19.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMThttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10664-2003Jul4.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialshttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10664-2003Jul4.html?nav=rss_politics/specials/gaymarriage/editorialsFri, 19 Nov 2004 14:09:56 GMT whether or not entitled to formal recognition in the law, is within the liberty of persons to choose without being punished as criminals" (our italics). But the ruling -- as Justice Antonin Scalia noted in his angry dissent -- inevitably raises the far more contentious issue of whether such recognition should be extended to gay couples.]]>