couple of days ago and I was drunk a lot.
It was really interesting that someone would finally come along and take
all those whackadoodles at their word. I've been saying that there are
two things that would be the logical extension of the marriage debate:
1) if marriage is about bringing a man and a woman together to have
children for the glory of God (I can't remember who I heard say that
little tidbit) then that would bar my wife and I, seniors, the
infertile, the impotent and so on. 2) If gay marriage devalues marriage
then divorce does a much better job of doing that so divorce has got to go.
So the text and commentary:
An initiative filed by proponents of same-sex marriage would require heterosexual couples to have kids within three years or else have their marriage annulled. Initiative 957 was filed by the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance. That group was formed last summer after the state Supreme Court upheld Washington's ban on same-sex marriage. Under the initiative, marriage would be limited to men and women who are able to have children. Couples would be required to prove they can have children in order to get a marriage license, and if they did not have children
within three years, their marriage would be subject to annulment.
An interesting idea. It really does follow the logic of the Theocratic Conservatives in the States and spilling over into Canada. It smacks of a wholesale buy-in of the logic of mariage. But it's a logic that the Theo-cons themselves don't see. They would never step in to ban divorce
-- too big an infringement on their god given rights...or somesuch.
All other marriages would be defined as "unrecognized" and people in those marriages would be ineligible to receive any marriage benefits.
"For many years, social conservatives have claimed that marriage exists solely for the purpose of procreation ... The time has come for these conservatives to be dosed with their own medicine," said WA-DOMA organizer Gregory Gadow in a printed statement. "If same-sex couples should be barred from marriage because they can not have children together, it follows that all couples who cannot or will not have children together should equally be barred from marriage."
Supporters must gather more than 224,000 valid signatures by July 6 to put the initiative on the November ballot.
Opponents say the measure is another attack on traditional marriage, but supporters say the move is needed to have a discussion on the high court ruling.
The thing I like here at the end is that this is also an attack on traditional marriage. By going along with what people say you can also attack them. Now that's some sneaky, shifty gay agenda...
The Eternal Gaijin
Lost Somewhere in Wandsworth, London
"Words Cannot Describe What I Am About To Tell You."