DEFENDING HETRO MARRIAGE SRSLY
Sep. 11th, 2009 12:30 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
defrogITEM: John Marcotte of Sacramento, CA is trying to get a voter's initiative onto the 2010 ballot in California that would extend the logic of Prop 8 (which he supported) by banning divorce.
The initiative allows exceptions where the marriage is voidable (if one of the participants is mentally incapacitated or underage, for example), but otherwise would make any marriage legally permanent.
Of course it’s a terrible and silly idea. On the other hand, Marcotte – who says that anyone who supports Prop 8 but doesn’t support a ban on divorce is a hypocrite – has a point.
After all, divorce is the biggest threat to marriage. Even bigger than letting teh gayz do it. So if yr really serious about “protecting” marriage, logically you should enforce the vows people take.
Including yrs.
Or would that be, you know, intrusive into yr private life?
I predict EpicFail® – and not just because hypocrisy has never really been a barrier for hot-button political issues, especially the ones involving sexual morality and govt intervention thereof. And if it passes, I predict a massive drop in the new marriage rate in CA (and a sharp hockey-stick rise in the Las Vegas instant wedding industry).
Still, try that argument out on yr “Marriage Is For Hetros Only” friends and see where it gets you. And report the results back to me, please.
While yr at it, you can pass on this little nugget of wisdom from Rachel Maddow: in Massachusetts – where gay marriage has been legal since 2004 – the divorce rate between 2004 and 2008 dropped from 2.2 per thousand to 2.0 per thousand – the lowest rate since World War II.
Obviously there’s no real cause and effect in those numbers. But Maddow’s point stands: gay marriage hasn’t exactly destroyed the institution like the Prop 8 people always said it would.
California dreaming,
This is dF
The initiative allows exceptions where the marriage is voidable (if one of the participants is mentally incapacitated or underage, for example), but otherwise would make any marriage legally permanent.
Of course it’s a terrible and silly idea. On the other hand, Marcotte – who says that anyone who supports Prop 8 but doesn’t support a ban on divorce is a hypocrite – has a point.
After all, divorce is the biggest threat to marriage. Even bigger than letting teh gayz do it. So if yr really serious about “protecting” marriage, logically you should enforce the vows people take.
Including yrs.
Or would that be, you know, intrusive into yr private life?
I predict EpicFail® – and not just because hypocrisy has never really been a barrier for hot-button political issues, especially the ones involving sexual morality and govt intervention thereof. And if it passes, I predict a massive drop in the new marriage rate in CA (and a sharp hockey-stick rise in the Las Vegas instant wedding industry).
Still, try that argument out on yr “Marriage Is For Hetros Only” friends and see where it gets you. And report the results back to me, please.
While yr at it, you can pass on this little nugget of wisdom from Rachel Maddow: in Massachusetts – where gay marriage has been legal since 2004 – the divorce rate between 2004 and 2008 dropped from 2.2 per thousand to 2.0 per thousand – the lowest rate since World War II.
Obviously there’s no real cause and effect in those numbers. But Maddow’s point stands: gay marriage hasn’t exactly destroyed the institution like the Prop 8 people always said it would.
California dreaming,
This is dF
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
on 2009-09-11 04:46 am (UTC)~M~
no subject
on 2009-09-11 06:54 am (UTC)no subject
on 2009-09-11 12:01 pm (UTC)