As I write this, my partner in the unraveling of America's moral fabric is in Hillcrest inputting names into a database. He's spending part of his spring break to volunteer with Equality For All as they gear up to fight proposed initiatives that might make it on to the November ballot.
Among the 47 proposed initiatives currently in circulation are several that would attempt to limit marriage equality efforts, including one that would amend the state constitution to protect the "essence of marriage" and eliminate domestic partnerships.
Interesting to me that this comes up while the issue of the constitutionality of marriage equality is still pending before the California's Supreme Court , with the oral arguments having just been heard on March 4. Someone might want to wait and see how the court rules on what the constitution currently says before proposing to change the constitution. Regardless of their stance on the issue of marriage equality, someone might think that acting prematurely would be a complete and utter waste of taxpayers' money.
Alma
March 28, 2008 at 04:15 AM
Is the "essence of marriage" something that can be protected by banning someone else's relationship? The logic of the argument completely eludes me. I'm no expert on marriage but it seems like relationships need nurturing by the people committed to them, not by focusing on things outside of one's control.
How can "protecting" whatever it means to have an "essence of marriage" make any sense when divorce flourishes? Maybe that's the next ballot proposition. The "if you say it's for life it is, no matter what" proposition.
No thanks.
Davesnot
from Oceanside
March 28, 2008 at 07:35 AM
It's simple.. life.. liberty.. pursuit of happiness.. why do people freak out because two people want to get married.. I just don't get it.. If Joe Bob next door goes out and buys a Big Mac it ain't hardening my arteries.. let him eat the damn thing... If Joe Bob wants to marry Bob Joe.. let him. .. sheesh.
If you wanna let your neighbors regulate what you do to _that_ extent.. let's take an IQ test and let the smart ones make the rules.
What I don't get is all this conservative crap about not having big government.. then they want to stick big government right up.. uh.. ..
It's such a shame that we have to waste time and energy fighting for people's rights that should just be a given... if it wasn't so real it would be funny.. it's a joke.. but unfortunately not very funny.
Steven
March 30, 2008 at 05:48 AM
I love
this take
on gay marriage, myself. Long live
2
!
Matt Scallon
from A safe distance from the abortionist's forceps
April 01, 2008 at 12:39 AM
Dear Charles,
On the one hand, you say that you don't want "one-sided spouting of polemic opinion on different virtual soapboxes." But, earlier in the same posting, you refered to an initiative which, acccording to its supporters, is a protection for the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, as an initiative which "would attempt to limit marriage equality efforts." I hate to state the obvious, but that former statement contradicts the latter.
Blogger heal thyself. If you don't like polemics, don't spout them. If you spout polemics, don't complain about other blogger's literary plumbing.
