I don't generally like Guerrilla theater. I think that those puppets at the protest marches suck wet farts from dead pigeons, and make the anti-war community look like people who "had too much LDS in the 60s".
This one is *&^$ing brilliant.
This initiative is sponsored by The Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance.
I particularly LOVE their Orwellian name choice, which echoes the naming used by groups like, the Global Climate Coalition (fronted by coal), and the the Center for Consumer Freedom (fronted by booze and tobacco).
The Washington State Supreme Court said that there is a"legitimate state interest" allowing the Legislature to limit marriage to those couples able to have and raise children together, so it's permissible to ban same sex marriage.
So they are proposing to restrict hetro marriage to those couples who are willing and able to crank out babies.
I think that this is something that all of the Kos community should get behind, getting stuff like this on the ballot is expensive and labor intensive.
(more on the flip side)
From their home page:
- add the phrase, "who are capable of having children with one another" to the legal definition of marriage;
- require that couples married in Washington file proof of procreation within three years of the date of marriage or have their marriage automatically annulled;
- require that couples married out of state file proof of procreation within three years of the date of marriage or have their marriage classed as "unrecognized;"
- establish a process for filing proof of procreation; and
- make it a criminal act for people in an unrecognized marriage to receive marriage benefits.
Here is their press release:
Statement by Gregory Gadow, Sponsor of I-957 (the Defense of Marriage Initiative)
January 25, 2007
On July 26, 2006, the Washington Supreme Court issued their ruling on Andersen v. King County, decided jointly with Castle v. Washington. These cases sought to overturn Washington’s Defense of Marriage Act, which bans same-sex couples from the hundreds of rights, protections and privileges which state law provides through marriage. In their ruling, the Supreme Court claimed a "legitimate state interest" in defining marriage exclusively for the purpose of procreation and child-rearing. The justices then used this interest to declare that same-sex couples are properly barred from marriage because they are incapable of procreating.
In response, a group of concerned citizens formed the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance this past August. Our agenda is to shine a very bright light on the injustice and prejudice that underlie the Andersen decision by giving that decision the full force of law. Over the next few years, we will propose three initiatives to the people, each focusing on a different aspect of Andersen. The first initiative will make procreation a requirement for legal marriage. The second would prohibit divorce or separation when a married couple has children together. The third would make having a child together the equivalent of marriage.
Each of the initiatives we get passed will, no doubt, be struck down as unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court. Good; that is our ultimate goal. Each ruling against these initiatives will also be a ruling against the basis for keeping the state’s Defense of Marriage Act. Eventually, Andersen will fall apart under the weight of judicial opinion, and equal marriage – the marriage which we seek to defend – shall become a reality in this state.
The first of our initiatives, which would make procreation a requirement for legal marriage in Washington, was submitted to Secretary of State Sam Reed on January 9, 2007. On January 22, the final draft was accepted and assigned the serial number 957. To make the November ballot, we need to collect 224,880 valid signatures. To cover the likelihood that not all of the signatures will be valid, we have set a goal of 280,000.
For many years, social conservatives have claimed that marriage exists solely for the purpose of procreation. The Washington Supreme Court echoed that claim in their lead ruling on Andersen v. King County. The time has come for these conservatives to be dosed with their own medicine. If same-sex couples should be barred from marriage because they can not have children together, it follows that all couples who can not or will not have children together should equally be barred from marriage. And this is what the Defense of Marriage Initiative will do.
If you want to see equal marriage become a reality in Washington State, I urge you to support I-957. If we work together, we can do it.
FWIW, they have two more initiatives coming down the pipe:
This initiative is the first of three that WA-DOMA has planned for upcoming years. The other two would prohibit divorce or separation when a married couple has children together, and make having a child together the equivalent of marriage.
If this sounds like "The Handmaiden's Tale" to you, that is the idea. The Talibaptists see that has their desired end society, and getting people to reject this NOW is a good thing.