California isn’t the only state voting this November on an amendment that defines marriage. I wonder if we’ll have to have constitutional amendments to define all the other words in the dictionary some day. But anyway…
Arizona is also voting on such an amendment, Proposition 102, a grand total of 20 words to add to the state constitution: Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid and recognized as a marriage in this state.
That sounds good to me. That’s what a marriage is. From an even greater power than the Arizona legislature we learn that, “marriage between a man and woman is ordained of God.” So for a legislature to come up with what they did, they aren’t that far off.
But what about love?
Actually, you can get married without love, and a lot of people have. I happen to believe a marriage is better with love. But no one goes into a marriage with the same amount of love they have 1, 5, 10, 50 years into a marriage.
It is also perfectly possible to love someone and not marry them. I’ve done it many times. There are many many people that I love, but I have yet to marry any of them. The Primary song says “Jesus said love everyone; treat them kindly, too.” It does not say that we were commanded to marry everyone we love, just that we are to love them.
This amendment will not change at all who people are allowed to love. In fact, it would be better if there were more love in the world, without us having to be legislated to love people. This amendment says absolutely nothing about love. All this amendment does is define what types of relationships will be called a marriage. This amendment is legislating a definition only, with no regard whatsoever to love.
And there is absolutely nothing wrong with defining a word.
I am an educator and PhD. I quilt, belly dance, run, read, and try to grow things. I am a Mormon. I am infertile. I am a daughter, sister, aunt, grand-daughter, friend, wife, and mom.
Brett L. Dennis
Mama g
Giggles
AmandaStretch
These votes on this issue are even more important now that the judicial branch in a third state (Connecticut) has decided today they have the power to define marriage as something other than what it truly is.
NPR did a story today about California’s Proposition 8. One line in the story is the EXACT reason why everyone should vote for it:
That’s right. California voters already voted to make same-sex marriages illegal once. But the Supreme Court of California decided the voters didn’t know what they were talking about and changed it. The people of California need to vote for Proposition 8 if for no other reason than as a check and balance on the Supreme Court.
Thank you for that post! Jared and I went door to door for Prop 8. Most people in our area were voting yes on prop 8, but some were definitely against it and some were neutral. Some of those neutral votes I wanted to say “if you don’t care about marriage at least vote yes for democracy!” and when I told another man about voting yes for prop 8 to keep them from teaching in schools, he said “it won’t go that far” Yeah right!
I would like to take this moment to applaud these states. They have amendments on their state constitutions defining marriage as it always was intended to be (except Hawaii, who at least have an amendment saying the legislature has the power to define it, but it’s something). You will note that there are more than half the states in the nation on this list.
Alabama 2006 81%
Alaska 1998 68%
Arkansas 2004 75%
Colorado 2006 56%
Georgia 2004 76%
Hawaii 1998 69
Idaho 2006 63%
Kansas 2005 70%
Kentucky 2004 75%
Louisiana 2004 78%
Michigan 2004 59%
Mississippi 2004 86%
Missouri 2004 71%
Montana 2004 67%
Nebraska 2000 70%
Nevada 2002 67%
North Dakota 2004 73%
Ohio 2004 62%
Oklahoma 2004 76%
Oregon 2004 57%
South Carolina 2006 78%
South Dakota 2006 52%
Tennessee 2006 81%
Texas 2005 76%
Utah 2004 66%
Virginia 2006 57%
Wisconsin 2006 59%