Mind Changing...
Okay, as most of you know, I live in Central Wisconsin...Stevens Point to be specific. About as close to the middle of the state as you can get. A small all-American University town that boasts activism and "tolerance". I also live in what pundits call a "blue state". Which, as you may know, is primarily liberal/democrat. Okay...got the intro out of the way. Now let me tell you what's on my mind this morning.
Lately, the airwaves and press have been going crazy over the upcoming vote this November. There are several hot-button items on the ballot. One of them being the proposed amendment to the state Constitution to redefine marriage. Here's the proposal in it's entirety on what's being voted for:
"Marriage. Shall section 13 of article XIII of the constitution be created to provide that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state and that a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state?"
So that would appear to be one of the biggest issues facing Wisconsin voters this November. As such, you see signs encouraging people to vote "no" on this. Signs EVERYWHERE. Since this is a University town, the "liberal" LGBT community and student activists are going out en masse and trying to convince everyone that the proposed amendment will hurt more than just the gay community. They want freedom and equality for all...at least that's what they say.
Just this last weekend, while driving to the market with my family, I happened to notice one of the few "Vote Yes" signs on a yard. On this sign, someone had spray-painted a neon orange swastika on it. What...the...hell.... Everyone driving through our town was greeted to a swastika on a friggin political sign. Yeah, real great job showing the world how "tolerant" you are of anyone who disagrees with you. Buncha friggin hypocrites if you ask me.
So...the "Vote No" community has shown their true colors. Fantastic. As an undecided voter, I was waiting for information from both sides to make my final decision. Seeing that swastika on that sign made my mind up for me. I will now vote yes on the amendment. Why?
Well from the no side of the house we were given several scare tactics. Of course the gay community played the "I can't see my partner in the hospital" or "I won't be able to live off his/her pensions" cards. Then the "Fair Wisconsin" site hypes the fear even further with examples of this "far reaching" ban.
From the "yes" side of the house? Well the "Vote Yes for Marriage" site simply offers up common-sense answers to the questions. That's it. No fear-mongering. No use of a top ten list on why they'll win. Finally...nowhere on the site does it use the term "foot soldiers" to define their volunteers.
You take a look at both sides and tell me which is the more radical site? Which one is using intimidation and scare tactics? Which one actually welcomes the undecided voter and attempts to give them a clear picture? From my perspective, the Vote No community practices the very extremism they claim to fight.
So...what does yours truly think? Quite simply, I believe that the idea of marriage should be a sacred bond between a man and a woman. That's it. Simple. As such, when you are married you should be entitled to the benefits allowed by law for married couples. Just because some guy likes getting sexually fulfilled by allowing something to enter his anus, or because some lady has an aversion to the penis, that does NOT mean they are entitled the same privileges of being married.
They all cry about not having equal rights. News flash people, you DO have equal rights when it comes to marriage. You can all choose to find a spouse and marry them. That is your right. Justifying your sexual fetish by rewarding it with special treatment is NOT a right. In fact, it gives the LGBT community ADDITIONAL rights and thus nullifies the idea of equality. Simply stepping up and demanding you and your partner to be married opens up the door for the next sexual minority.
What's next? If we can easily throw out the mandate that a marriage is between a man and a woman, and replace it with "two individuals", what's next? "Two beings"? "Two Items"? I guess the old schoolyard insult of "If you like it so much, why not marry it?" carries a little more weight in our politically correct society.
But then again, those are just my views. For you Wisconsin residents, take a look at the two sites listed above. Make your own decision. I've made mine based on facts, reaction to extremism, and common sense.
posted by Silentwarrior @ 5:27 AM
4 Comments:
Craft Store
It's one thing for the state to refuse to recognize same-sex marriage, but I'm concerned that it does more than this: "legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state" -- does that mean that people are prohibited from entering into certain kinds of civil contracts? What if an employer (say, a fashion company) wanted to attract more designers and decided to offer benefits for same-sex partners. Would they be allowed to under this law? What if a gay person wanted to make a living will and grant limited power of attorney to their partner?
Would this mean that domestic-violence laws no longer apply to unmarried couples-- so if a dude is beating his girlfriend (or boyfriend) it only counts as domestic violence if they're married?
In my opinoion, that's more than just a ban on gay marriage.
Indeed, it has the potential to be far more than simply a ban on gay marriage. From what I understand about the second portion of the proposed amendment, it's designed to prevent the creation of essentially a marriage by any other name.
It does nothing to prevent future legislation to ensure the privleges of same sex relationships in terms of benefits and contracts. Perhaps it takes it out of the government's hands and places it with the private establishment... I don't know. I don't have all the answers, I'd be lying if I even pretended to have a majority of the answers.
The reason why I'm supporting this amendment was stated in the post above. All the sky-is-falling, end of civil rights as we know it nonsense, plus the brutish nature of the opponents of this amendment swayed my vote. Spray painting swastikas, telling people that they're bigots or homophobes because they ask for answers, using fear and intimidation as tools to sway a voter. Even if they were advocating free cheesecake for everyone on demand, I still wouldn't side with them. We have enough of those tactics currently being used by the current Federal government.
Will it affect more than gay couples? Yes. Will it create legal challenges in the future? Oh hell yeah. What alot of the general public can't or doesn't want to understand is that the passage of this amendment could have the potential to benefit their cause in the long run. Let's say it passes, and the public suddenly realizes that the problems outweight the benefits of such an amendment, or it's deemed unconstitutional by the courts. You then have the amendment repealed under the knowledge that such an action is unworthy of support. It's easier to defend an "I told you so" than a "What if".
But as stated in my post above, these are only my opinions on the matter. I'm only an average Joe writing his thoughts on the matter on a mediocre blog.
My personal opinion is the gays can get the same essential legal & financial entanglements as marriage through the simple use of contract law - powers of attorney & such. I don't see any necessary reason for a law allowing gay marriage or civil union.
The second part of the amendment (as I read it) wouldn't prevent such contracts.
Post a Comment
<< Home