If there’s anyone out there who can give me an acceptable answer to either of the following two questions, I’ll be very surprised:
- Just how, exactly, would extending the right of marriage to same-sex couples have ANY effect (positive or negative) on any existing heterosexual marriage?
- When discussing Constitutional law and human rights, what does it really matter what God or the Bible have to say about anything (or even what Confucius or The Great Pumpkin say, for that matter)?
Granted, they’re both more or less rhetorical questions and it would be hard to find an answer to satisfy me. But they’re the primary idiocies being used to defend the passage of California Proposition 22 next week.
Note that I’m not putting down God, the Bible, Confucius, or (heaven forbid) The Great Pumpkin here. I’m just stating that religious teachings are no more a basis for extending (or denying) human rights in this country than are the oft-cited “court of public opinion” or the idea that allowing more motivated couples to marry will somehow “weaken” the institution.
Ultimately, Proposition 22 will pass, it will be challenged in court, and (eventually) it will be overturned. You can’t vote on human rights in a public referendum and expect it to stick or to have a valid outcome. I doubt that plantation owners in South Carolina would have been chomping at the bit to outlaw slavery in 1860, had such a referendum occurred, for example.
Anyway, please don’t hesitate to vote simply because this referendum shouln’t be on the ballot and will be eventually declared unconstitutional. Vote no on 22. While you’re at it, consider voting no on 21 (for being just plain wrong) and on 23 and 27 (for being just plain silly). If you want to vote yes on something, go for 30 and 31.
I’ll skip the presidential candidates for now. Would that I could continue doing so in the future as well…