Elaine Thompson / AP
Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire, seated, raises her arms as legislators and supporters cheer behind her after she signed into law a measure that legalizes same-sex marriage Monday, Feb. 13, 2012, in Olympia, Wash.
Opponents of a Washington state law legalizing same-sex marriage have now blocked it from taking effect just one day before it was scheduled to do so, and one day after yesterday's good news for opponents of California's Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriage.
After a momentous signing ceremony this February by governor Christine Gregoire, Washington was set to become the seventh state in the country to make same-sex marriage legal. Before the bill was signed, Washington allowed domestic partnerships, and in 2011, Governor Gregoire signed a law that would recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages as domestic partnerships in state.
But that's all on hold now, thanks to the group Preserve Marriage Washington, and their submission of over 200,000 signatures today seeking a public vote on the issue in November. A statement from the group defends their position by saying that legalizing same-sex marriage is not about granting equality, but about creating a competing definition of marriage that would ultimately hurt children:
Why has virtually every society throughout history defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman? The answer can be summarized in one word: children.
Protecting the interests of children is the primary reason that government regulates and licenses marriage in the first place. After all, government does not license or regulate any other form of intimate relationship - not friendship, or dating, or cohabitation. People are free, under the law, to live as they choose, cohabitate with whomever they choose and engage in sexually intimate relationships with whomever they choose - all without any governmental recognition or regulation.
Last month on Hardball, Chris Matthews and Rep. Barney Frank of Mass— America's first openly-gay congressman — got into a heated exchange with Tony Perkins, the head of the Family Research Council, about legalizing same-sex marriage after President Obama spoke out in support of marriage equality (video below). Perkins defended his position with the same "for the children" argument that seems to be par for the course among same-sex marriage opponents these days.
I think Chris Matthews put it best in that segment: "A marriage is not just spawning. It's not just having kids. It's staying together. It's forming a family. Forming a family is what we're talking about here, and honoring a family."
The time and money spent fighting marriage-equality laws is unproductive. The definition of "family" has changed in the past few decades alone, and if you were to ban same-sex couples from being married because it would hurt children to not have one mother and one father, then you would have to likewise condemn single parents, or people with fertility issues.
Perhaps that's the point.
Chris Matthews leads a heated debate between Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., and Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, about same-sex marriage.
Leave a Comment:
I'm sorry; I missed the part where unmarried people who are friends/dating/cohabitating never have kids.
Why Doesnt America just Eliminate "Marriage" All Together -- What Good Is It Anyway - It Causes Nothing But Problems - Period !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It Would Save Paper !!!
Think of the econonmy and how much better it will be when gays get to register for wedding / bridal/ baby shower gifts
and if i have to use basic logic for those against it
I am glad to see the heterosexual marriage of Kim Kardishian made it almost 3 days for the millions of dollars spent to make it happen.
As shown again we find use for our Christian bigots!!!
As one individual, living in Washington state I will recognize any couple that considers themselves to be married. Nothing any group can do to change that. If we all do it, we can take away all the hate groups power. Simplistic? yeah. the right thing to do? definitely.
Until fairly recently, cohabitation was illegal in many states. Fornication was illegal in many states. Many states DO regulate cohabitation -- NY recognized same sex partners as members of the "family" for housing purposes in the 1990s.
So, the entry was a tad bit off. Yes, children was a primary reason for the regulation of marriage but marriage was created for a number of reasons, reasons that apply to those who are past the age of having children etc. Control/care of women, inheritance and other matters applies too.
Same sex marriage was not recognized because of stereotypes on gender roles. This is ultimately a matter of sex discrimination. Homosexuality itself was seen from ancient times as unnatural in part because it violates sex roles.
"Why has virtually every society throughout history defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman? "
ARE YOU KIDDING? They HAVE NOT done any such thing
My god Melissa your forebearers were MORMON. Talk about rewriting history. Is there any wonder why we can't have an honest descussion about anything in this country anymore?