I didn't believe it either....but Tristero over at Digby posted this link from (wait for it...)FOX NEWS in 2004 ..here's the whole article...
Wednesday, October 27, 2004
WASHINGTON — Some conservative groups expressed dismay Tuesday over President Bush's (search) tolerance of state-sanctioned civil unions between gay people — laws that would grant same-sex partners most or all the rights available to married couples.
"I don't think we should deny people rights to a civil union, a legal arrangement, if that's what a state chooses to do so," Bush said in an interview aired Tuesday on ABC. Bush acknowledged that his position put him at odds with the Republican platform, which opposes civil unions.
"I view the definition of marriage different from legal arrangements that enable people to have rights," said Bush, who has pressed for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage (search). "States ought to be able to have the right to pass laws that enable people to be able to have rights like others."
Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (search) backs civil unions for gay couples, too. He opposes gay marriage but also opposes the idea of a constitutional ban.
(Story continues below)
Now...The New Jersy Supreme Court just ruled this afternoon that Civil Unions cannot be banned because rights cannot be denied to same-sex couples...
Paraphrased by Tristero:
The court found no fundamental right to same-sex marriage, but found that unequal dispensation of rights and benefits were contrary to the constitution. That sounds like something old St. McCain, who has flipped flop more than a dying carp on this issue, agrees with. The NJ legislature will have to find some way to profer equal rights and benefits to same-sex couples. Unless it decides to, the state will not be obligated to perform any marriage ceremonies. They could decide that it's a simple form that must be filled out and notarized. Churches will have to decide if they want to perform ceremonies or not, just as they do today, and the state has nothing to say about it --- just as it doesn't today. All this amounts to is equality under the law.
In other words, the Wisconsin "Protection of Marriage Act" is probably just as unconstitutional as the laws of New Jersey.....This should be viewed as a great victory for our friends at FAIR WISCONSIN....