|
So, one of the things that will be voted upon in the upcoming election is an amendment to the constitution of the State of Wisconsin. For those of you that don't know how this works in Wisconsin: a proposed amendment needs to be passed by majority vote in two separate sessions of the state legislature. A "session" is a year's worth of legislative work, so the amendment has to wait at least two years...
If passed twice by the legislature, the proposed amendment goes onto the next general election ballot and it must be approved by a simple majority of the state's registered voters. That is where we are at... in about a month this proposed amendment will be offered up for approval or rejection by the voters.
The marriage amendment specifies that marriage is a union of one man and one woman. It goes on to state that same sex marriages and civil unions (or other significant partnerships) will NOT be recognized in this state.
Amendments like this have been passed in nearly 20 states of the USA at this point in time. In Michigan, the amendment is now being interpreted to mean that no forms of domestic partnerships or domestic partnership benefits can be recognized. The as yet unforeseen interpretations of this kind of amendment are something to think about when making a decision on this sort of issue.
Setting aside one's personal attitude toward sexual orientations other than the "traditional" heterosexual orientation, what we are talking about here is writing discrimination into our legal system. Similar debates occurred decades ago when the white majority, feeling threatened by affirmative action and the increase in the numbers of inter-racial couples wanted to stop these kinds of relationships being recognized.
The same kinds of arguments were used "It will threaten the institution of 'the family'!" "It's not natural!" "It goes against religious doctrine!" Fatuous, meaningless, prejudicial areguments.
There is a fair body of psychological research that strongly suggests that one's sexual orientation is strongly influenced by a combination of genetics and prenatal environment. While there are certainly other factors involved, the strength of these two factors is important: sexual orientation is not an issue of choice for every person, for many it may be as integral a part of their being as their eye color, skin color or blood type.
Other research that indicates that the children of gay or lesbian couples are no more or less likely to be homosexual than the children of hetersexual couples. That the happiness of a child and how well adjusted they are has more to do with the strength of their caretakers' relationship than their sexual orientation.
The simple fact of the matter is that this amendment, and the laws that would come from it, will only serve to make discriminatory practices legal.
My own perspective is this:
Marriages and civil unions are partnerships that two people get into wherein the couple share financial, social, emotional, and whatever other -als responsibilites and rights. It is a legal partnership, recognized by the nation and the state, giving the members of the couple certain rights and responsibilities with respect to each other. People don't like to frame it in such objective terms, but from a legal standpoint this is what a marriage is whether it was performed by a rabbi, a priest, a justice of the peace, an imam... whoever.
Religious marriages have traditionally been accorded the same legal status as a union or marriage performed by a member of the judiciary, but the reverse (recognition of a civil ceremony by a religious institution) has NOT and IS NOT always the case. Both of these things seems to be a well accepted part of life in this country. According to the government, my wife and I are married... according to many religious institutions, we would NOT be considered married, because we did not have it done by a religious officiary. Doesn't bother us... their views mean nothing to us or our commitment to each other.
If a religious organization wishes to impose their own set of values upon THEIR ceremonies and restrict marriage to only heterosexual couples, that's fine. Religions are basically exclusive clubs that have their own set of rules that members must abide by and one does not have to join/stay a member if one does not like the rules. There are plenty of alternative religions out there.
However, it is NOT the place of government to restrict the rights of consenting adults to participate in relationships or partnerships that they choose to particpate in, as long as those relationships or partnerships are consensual AND do not in any way harm the rights of others. Separation of church and state demands that religiously motivated prejudices NOT become discriminatory secular laws.
Just as miscegnation laws and Jim Crow laws were morally and ethically wrong, codifying discrimination based upon sexual preference is also wrong. Discrimination is discrimination whether it be committed against people of other ethnicities, races, sexual orientations, religions, etc. Laws should protect peoples' rights, not limit or strip them.
So, I would recommend that, if you feel strongly about this issue, you make sure that you go and participate in the general election on November 7.
Personally, I encourage you to vote against this amendment.I'm feelin' :  Pontificatory What's that I hear?: Normal Like You by Everclear |
|
Hi.
Been a while. My bad, but things are busy busy. I'll try to be better about this as time goes forward and update more and more. the only major news in my life is Lily and I post images of her as i can on her site. If you don't know where it is, ask.
Anyway, I will be updating a few times in the next few weeks. There is an election coming up and I think it's important to discuss it a bit and get people thinking about it. Please don't immediately tune me out when i talk about this... I won't be telling you HOW to vote, but why it's important to vote. I will outline my own particular stance and intention to vote if i feel that it's appropriate, but I won't tell you how to vote.
These will be aimed mostly at people living in Wisconsin... we have a number of important elections coming up as well as several referendum questions, including one that has the potential to amend the constitution of the state.
With this entry I wanted to warn you of my intentions and to make an initial plea... I've talked to a few of the people here at UWM and elsewhere. They often tell me that they don't know enough about the various races to want to go and vote and that they'd feel dumb if they didn't vote for each race on the ballot.
On the first point, with the advent of the internet, virtually every race will have websites dedicated to the different candidates/sides of the questions at issue. If you're reading this, you're at least savvy enough to go to Google and type in a few search terms. To give you a starting point, here is a listing from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal of all of the races that will be decided upon on November 7. If you don't know your district (for all the local races), that shouldn't be too hard to look up online, either.
There are a couple of minor referendum questions (referendum questions in Wisconsin are only advisory). There is also a question on the ballot about an amendment to the state constitution with respect to the definition of marriage. thie link takes you to a couple Journal Sentinal articles about the topic and also has a link to an acrobat file containing the actual language of the proposed amendment.
On the second topic of "I don't really know enough to vote on all the issues" or "I would feel funny only filling out part of the ballot." It's a secret ballot, no one will know but you what races or items you placed your vote on. And really, who cares? It's no one's business but your own. If you feel strongly about even one single issue, you should go and vote, make your opinion and voice heard. You only have to cast your opinion with regard to that one item and no other, if you wish. But at least you have contributed your opinion to the mix...
"But so many people vote, my one vote won't make a difference!" Maybe, but with enough people with that opinion, it can become a difference. A look at the last couple elections should suggest to you how important your vote can be... in 2000 Gore won the popular vote by slim enough a margin that the votes from the electoral college favored Bush. In 2004 Bush won by an incredibly narrow margin. I'm not trying to pick on Bush here... but you can see that if only 100 people from each county in Wisconsin had the same view and did not vote... that's 7800 people... more than the margin by which Kerry won Wisconsin in 2004.
Your vote can make a difference... I encourage you to get informed and to vote...
Next time, the Marriage Amendment to the Wisconsin State Constitution.I'm feelin' :  Pontificatory What's that I hear?: The Traveling Wilburys Like a Ship |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
plenz's journal