From the Roanoke Times:
Standing before a crowd recently at Hollins Road Baptist Church in Roanoke, Victoria Cobb of the Family Foundation of Virginia, which is pushing for the measure’s passage, said the term mischaracterizes the proposed amendment.
“It sounds like it is putting forward gay marriage instead of preventing it,” Cobb said. “Uninformed voters could read gay marriage amendment and assume it is put forward to support gay marriage. That essentially turns a ‘yes’ vote into a ‘no’ vote.”
I didn’t figure folks were that dumb. Cobb would much rather see this amendment be called, as it says further down in the article, the “Affirmation of Marriage” amendment. We here call it the Marshall-Newman Amendment, which is a neutral term simply using the names of the legislators who sponsored it. If Marshall-Newman reflects badly on the amendment, it must reflect badly on Delegate Marshall also.
It’s a sad state of affairs when the “affirmation of marriage” means taking away rights for gays and unmarried couples. How is it “affirming” marriage when bar loving couples from marrying (on top of other bans)? Marriages too weak to survive gay couples getting married have, alas, other issues.
“What would I call it? The fear amendment,” said Sam Garrison, a retired Roanoke lawyer who opposes the amendment. “The whole thing is about people being afraid for the new world.”
That’s rather accurate also. These times, they are a-changing. The fight for equality for all is an exorable march forward. Eventually, one day, equality will win.
Sooner or later, it always does.
No comments yet.