Early voting has started and there are nine amendments to the Texas Constitution on the November 8th ballot, so be sure to educate yourself on them and vote! Personally, my general litmus test for voting on constitutional amendments is this:
Do they increase choices for citizens or not?
If they do, I generally vote for them, whether or not I think the choice they would be allowing is a good one. If they restrict citizen choices, however, I vote no. Don't get me wrong, though: I am no libertarian. I am more of a maternal-feminist-neo-populist type (read: I'm gonna breastfeed in your restaurant whether you like it or not but you had better not smoke in it around my kids). I vote for plenty of laws that restrict the choices of individual citizens for what I deem to be the good of the broader society, and I will continue to do so. I think laws and constitutional amendments require different decision-making processes, though. Laws are very fluid, they are about all kinds of things and they change all the time based upon our changing values as a society. The constitution is about our form of government (how we decide on our laws, etc.) and about our rights. I think that's different.
The only one of these proposed amendments that really gets my dander up is Proposition 2, which provides that marriage in this state consists only of the union of one man and one woman and prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage. Now, for one thing, this baby is rather poorly written. It may, in fact, invalidate all our marriages, which I would not be in favor of, being rather attached to mine. If it did inadvertently do that, though, it would be just what its writers deserve for trying to enshrine state-sponsored bigotry into our very constitution. Shame on them! Who do they think they are?
They seem to think they are a church, and that they are dealing in sacraments which involve certain religious belief systems that must be adhered to in order to receive said sacrament. They are not churches, however, and marriage, as a state construct, is not a sacramental matter. It is a matter of the rights of citizens. As such, the state has no business discriminating against some citizens and giving them fewer rights than others. It is ludicrous and un-American to even consider it!
No one denies that certain faiths believe homosexuality is wrong or that those faiths have the right to decide who does and does not qualify to receive the sacrament of marriage in their faith. Religious freedom is one of our most precious freedoms, after all. That is not the role of the state, however. The state must treat all of its citizens with equality and fairness and to deny gay people the right to marry is to violate the principles of equality upon which our nation is based.
Personally, I am saddened and outraged by the continued bigotry and discrimination that gay people face in our society. The last thing I want is to see that bigotry enshrined in our constitution. It is bad enough that it is already a part of our current law. It already hurts enough families. Please vote no on Proposition 2.
4 comments:
Ever get very weary of this big RED state of ours, LSM?
I'm headed out to vote! No to 2!
Of this sort of thing, I do indeed. Thanks, Triana.
****If it did inadvertently do that, though, it would be just what its writers deserve for trying to enshrine state-sponsored bigotry into our very constitution****
See, I thiught that too. Yes, the bigotry makes me very angry.
How very sad!
Too bad you can't vote twice.
It's so hard to change the world when there are so many spreading hate and fear!
Post a Comment