How can you promote marriage equality?
4 p.m. EST update on June 7, 2005: I'm told the pledge form is working again. My apologies for the inconvenience.
Despite the Goodridge victory in Massachusetts, the battle for same-sex marriage has only begun. Many states have passed constitutional bans on gay marriage. Opponents of equal marriage rights even seek to amend the U.S. Constitution.
The Vacation Pledge for Equal Marriage Rights encourages states to take the landmark step to democratically legalize same-sex marriage.
Why is legislative action so important and how can individuals help to promote it?
President Bush's claim is that the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment is necessary to stop "activist judges" from forcing same-sex marriage on a resistant populace. The president justifies the amendment in the name of "democratic action" and "the voice of the people." But as I've argued in the Hartford Courant and LA Times, the amendment is fundamentally anti-democratic: It would prohibit states from legislatively embracing equal marriage rights. If one brave state could use the legislative process to extend marriage to same sex couples, it could disprove the assertion that only "activist judges" want marriage equality. This might impede the rush to write discrimination into the US Constitution.
Here's how it works: by signing the pledge, individuals promise to take a vacation in the first state that enacts same-sex marriage through a popular or legislative vote, within three years after the legislation takes effect. Many states rely heavily on tourism revenues, and the Vacation Pledge creates a concrete incentive for a state to do the right thing.
Taking a vacation is a small price to pay for greater equality. Will you sign?
| Permalink | technorati
Comments (9)
This guest blog dances to but a single tune.
Yes above, this is but a single tune.
If I were to play it would be all men and women should be free to do as they wish and only themselves and the legal empowerment of others (re marriage etc) would limit this.
Anyway, Is anyone else freaking out about Grokster??
US Amici is very interesting - dont change law, dont re-interpret, just get more concise about what was actually said.
PS - When should any person decide the rights of another? Answer:- when they get elected.
Here's what I'm for. Remove all legislation which speaks to the topic, either pro or con. Marriage is a religious ceremony so the govenment should leave it alone.
I believe that if a state is going to enact marriage equality, it should do it for the right reason, and that reason is not a commercial one. I think this is a general problem with Dean (seemingly increasingly common) device of using commercial incentives to achieve noncommercial ends -- it may be effective, but it obscures the real point involved.
I appreciate the prosion of gays wanting to be married but I just can't support it because it ignores reality.
Before I get flamed - I do support civil unions that would be legally equivelent to marriage.
The reason I oppose gay marriage is because being gay is a birth defect. It isn't normal. However it isn't seriously abnormal. But every human on earth (so far) comes from a male biological father and a female biological mother. To ignore that in the definition of marriage is to ignore why we exist. It is to ignore reproduction and evolution itself.
In my mind if we redefine marriage to include same sex then why not include Mormon poligimist couples, many of whom have children with multiple wives. Logically if we stretch marriage then this is logically in between marriage today and same sex marriage.
Blind people should have the same civil rights as sighed people. But it doesn't make blindness normal. and I'm not willing to change the definition of not blind so blind people can feel better about themselves. But - there does need to be good civil union laws to accomodate the civil rights of gays.
And - because the left ignored this reality e are still stuck with Bush as president. I personally resent the fact that there were 11 states where marriage protecting was on the ballot turning out Bush supporters and now all of us are stuck with Bush for 4 more years over an issue that quite frankly - they are right and we are wrong on.
There are a lot bigger issues politically to invest our political capital on. Gays aren't as oppressed as women or blacks. There's the war, the deficit, the enslavement of America by Christian Dominionists to name a few.
Loose the name marriage and I'll support it. Until then - I can't ignore reality. If I were king I'd move the line the other way to make marriage more exclusive to couples with children.
Marc Perkel said:
This makes absolutely no sense to me. Can you please explain what you mean?
Marc Perkel said:
Do you know something that even the research scientist haven't been able to prove yet?
Marc Perkel: Ignoring the question of whether being queer is a birth defect, do you think that heterosexuals who are biologically unable to have children should be allowed to marry? If so, how does that fit into your argument about queer people not fitting into the framework of procreation and reproduction?
EARN MONEY BY LEAVING YOUR COMPUTER ON
Wow, talk about easy money!
These are just search engines that get run
through this program. What they are doing
is paying to try to improve their numbers
with Alexa so they have a better chance of
competing with the big boys like Yahoo and
Google. Program runs in background and
should not interfere at all with anything
else you are doing.
http://bartsch.hypermart.net/roisrois.html
http://bartsch.hypermart.net/roisrois.html