Here is the full text of Ammendment #2 on Florida Ballots:
"Ballot Title:
FLORIDA MARRIAGE PROTECTION AMENDMENT
Ballot Summary:
This amendment protects marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.
Financial Impact Statement:
The direct financial impact this amendment will have on state and local government revenues and expenditures cannot be determined, but is expected to be minor.
Full Text:
ARTICLE I, NEW SECTION
DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized." - taken from Flaglerelections.com.
Florida has never been a particularly open-minded or, as my friends on the other side of the fence would say, liberal State when it comes to most things, but I have a fundamental issue with Voting for or against something that will have no impact on my life, yet will have the capacity to injure someone else's.
The fact that we call these Ammendments "Marriage Protection" as opposed to "Denial of Rights to Gays" ought to tell us something in and of itself.
I will have been married for nine years, come January. If my relationship with my husband was a crappy one for either or both of us, we'd go our separate ways, and no Legislature could save our marriage or make it last any longer. If, on the other hand, we are fine, we'll gladly spend the rest of our lives together. The State has absolutely no impact on the success or failure of my marriage. However, the benefits in taxation, hospital visitation, property ownership and inheritance, to name a few, are certainly there for the hubby and I.
Why would the people in this State, or any other for that matter, want to deny those same benefits to same sex couples is simply beyond me. Chances are, this ammendment will pass, after all, it sounds so fabulously good - Marriage Protection. The overt implication that the State can protect a sacred institution is in and of itself bizarrely unconstitutional sounding, but it's also blatantly false. Worse still, in my opinion, it is worded deceptively, at best.
The reality of the matter is they are not asking us to Protect Marriage. They are asking us to deny benefits and rights enjoyed by heterosexual couples to same sex couples. It is really that simple, and that black and white. I simply wish they had worded it as such, so that at least the people voting yes on it would know exactly what they were voting for. When our Constitution depends on the 75-word descriptor to explain the meaning of what we are voting for or against, I would simply prefer it if those words were plainly stated truths.
Meanwhile, the optimist in me is hoping that maybe Florida is changing for the better, and maybe the people in this State will decide that it's non of their business what others do in their bedrooms. Our rights as people shouldn't depend on the Good Book, - not in this country. I am hoping Florida Votes NO on 2.
Copyright (C) 2008, inna hardison. please, don't steal from the starving artists, it's illegal and well, just plain freakin' wrong!
:-)
Comments(41)