![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
forsythMan, how did I totally miss this? Virginia has one of those moronic "protection of marriage" amendments on the ballot for this election cycle.
Virginia has had stupid amendments before. A couple years back, there was an amendment to make hunting and fishing on public land a constitutional right, and to ensure that lottery proceeds would be spent on public education. I mean, seriously. What the hell? Those are stupid amendments. Those really needed to be there.
And this year we get "That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions.
This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage. "
That second paragraph is the legally dangerous one. I mean, which rights, benefits, etc of marriage can't other legal statusii have? Does it have to be all, or does it only have to duplicate some? It doesn't say. Because the purpose is just because "OMG TEH GAY!" What the fucking fuck, rednecks? Is gay people getting married REALLY worth all of this bullshit, while we're "at war"? Obviously so, which implies either that gay marriage is the GREATEST THREAT TO THIS NATION EVER!!!!one!!!!1, or that the War on Terror isn't that big a deal, or just that people are fucktards about sex. What does it matter who other people are fucking?
And there's two other amendments up this election cycle. Lemme see. The other is asking if we should delete part of the constitution banning the incorporation of churches because it was ruled unconstitutional(?) and I'm really not sure of the significance of that whole thing. And the third is asking if we should allow localities to provide an exemption to property taxes for real estate with new structures located in conservation zones. That sounds bad, giving tax breaks to developers building in areas that are supposed to be for conservation?
Man. I need to start paying more attention to local politics. Not that the local Republican politicos will give any more of a shit about what I think than national ones do, but y'know.
Virginia has had stupid amendments before. A couple years back, there was an amendment to make hunting and fishing on public land a constitutional right, and to ensure that lottery proceeds would be spent on public education. I mean, seriously. What the hell? Those are stupid amendments. Those really needed to be there.
And this year we get "That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions.
This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage. "
That second paragraph is the legally dangerous one. I mean, which rights, benefits, etc of marriage can't other legal statusii have? Does it have to be all, or does it only have to duplicate some? It doesn't say. Because the purpose is just because "OMG TEH GAY!" What the fucking fuck, rednecks? Is gay people getting married REALLY worth all of this bullshit, while we're "at war"? Obviously so, which implies either that gay marriage is the GREATEST THREAT TO THIS NATION EVER!!!!one!!!!1, or that the War on Terror isn't that big a deal, or just that people are fucktards about sex. What does it matter who other people are fucking?
And there's two other amendments up this election cycle. Lemme see. The other is asking if we should delete part of the constitution banning the incorporation of churches because it was ruled unconstitutional(?) and I'm really not sure of the significance of that whole thing. And the third is asking if we should allow localities to provide an exemption to property taxes for real estate with new structures located in conservation zones. That sounds bad, giving tax breaks to developers building in areas that are supposed to be for conservation?
Man. I need to start paying more attention to local politics. Not that the local Republican politicos will give any more of a shit about what I think than national ones do, but y'know.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-10-23 03:10 am (UTC)Blegh.
no subject
Date: 2006-10-23 03:40 am (UTC)