Saturday, March 17, 2007

More Comments on Wash State Proposal Spurred by Alaskan Anti-Gay Marriage Ballot Item

You may remember this proposal from gay rights groups to annul the marriages of couples without children. In the wake of a ballot initiative to ban gay marriage in Alaska, a journalist adds more commentary to the proposal.

Have kids -- or else
They note that society has already made room for marriages that don't fit the traditional procreate-and-raise-children version. Some heterosexual couples are childless by choice. People who are past child-bearing age are still allowed to marry. Further, the activists say, if marriage is so important to child-raising, why do we let couples have children out of wedlock and remain unmarried? And why are married couples with children allowed to get divorced?

The "have children or lose your marriage" initiative probably won't ever reach Washington's voters. To qualify, it needs more than 200,000 signatures. But it doesn't have to make the ballot for organizers to make their point.

Society recognizes different kinds of relationships and child-raising arrangements. It won't be the end of marriage if heterosexuals and gays enjoy the same benefits and legal privileges when they make a lifetime commitment with their partner.
Technorati Tag:

1 comment:

Ashley said...

"furthers the state's interests in procreation and encouraging families with a mother and father and children biologically related to both." In other words, Washington state says marriage is for procreation and encouraging biological families."

It looks to me like the activists forgot to include adoptive parents in their plan. That would get even more people to realize how stupid these laws are.