There's a gay marriage thread, but I want to talk about the wording of this proposal, and why the president's position on it is dishonest.
President Bush backs this wording for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage:
"Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any State, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."
The story barely mentions the fact that it doesn't do what Bush says it will. It says that the US Constitution, any state constitution, any state law, or any federal law cannot allow the "legal incidents" of marriage. It allows civil unions in name only, and not the substantive common law rights that gay couples want (and that couples which happen to be straight have enjoyed for years). We're talking about things like inheritance and hospital visitation.
So, Bush supports a wording, says it will allow civil unions. Although it allows the state to create a status called a "civil union," it doesn't allow the state to grant any marriage-like rights under that status. Therefore, all it does is prevent the extension of simple rights and marital status by name to gay couples. Therefore, the President's position on the wording is correct only in the most technical sense imaginable.
He offers "civil unions," but doesn't offer us anything we can't put in quotes like that. His bill won't allow Civil Unions, complete with rights and stuff, but it will allow people to enter into a "civil union" in name only.