the scriptorium

Sunday, October 24, 2004

Crap! I just spent about a half an hour creating a beautifully crafted political rant piece, and my computer froze up. Now it's gone, gone, I tell you! Don't worry, all my liberal friends, you would have loved it. I'm not one of those "straight down the line, don't think for myself, just swallow the party platform" Republicans. My piece was about one of the hot issues in the upcoming election here in Kentucky, the Marriage Amendment. I won't try to recreate the post, since it was so long a rant; I'll just paraphrase. Here's what the proposal will look like on the ballot:

"Are you in favor of amending the Kentucky Constitution to provide that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be a marriage in Kentucky, and that a legal status identical to or similar to marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized?"(emphasis mine)

As this is written, I can't in good conscience vote for it. If they had stopped at the end of the first phrase, I might have been able to. I'm not really for legalized gay marriage, and I do believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman. I don't really think, however, that marriage should be or needs to be "defined" in either the state or federal constitution. Marriage is (or should be) a spiritual, not "legal" issue. In any case, the way this proposal is worded will have an impact on more than just gay couples wanting to get "married". Where I work, we provide outsourcing services for, among others, a major insurance company. I process dental claims for this company. Many of their policies are written with domenstic partner benefits included, and some have same-sex spousal benefits. This amendment would, in effect, make all those policies illegal in Kentucky. Surely our legislators have thought this far ahead, so all I can figure is that they are trying to un-open a door, which is all but impossible in politics. Once a benefit is allowed, you can't turn back the clock and un-allow it. (I realize that in fact you can, but my point is that you shouldn't.) Until I read the text of the proposal during research for this post, I was reluctantly leaning toward voting for it. That was one of the major points of my "brilliant" post. I urge those of you who do vote to do a little research into the issues of the various candidates before casting your ballot. Check into their voting records on various legislation, find out where they stand on the issues that you care about. Most importantly, figure out where you stand on the issues at hand. No matter which candidates you vote for, please be informed when making the decision. If, like me, you consider voting to be one of those "giving unto Caesar" aspects of living in the world, please take the time to do it properly. An uninformed voter is foolish at best and dangerous at worst. You have nine more days, and loads of resources available to help you make your decision intelligently.

UPDATE: It appears that, in a once-in-a-million chance, the Lexington Herald-Leader and I agree. Soon after I posted this, I read this editorial in today's paper. They are all for gay marriage, unlike myself, but like me they see all sorts of other problems created by the vague language of the proposal. They bring up issues concerning domestic violence and child support issues that I hadn't even thought of. I'll give the Herald props for one good editorial. :^)

posted by #Debi at 10:36 AM | permalink | 0 comments