Too scared to ever go back...

[judecorp]

As much as the affordability and the good friends draw me back to Columbus, it's things like THIS ARTICLE that really scare me into even considering it. There's so much at stake in my life, so much Jennifer and I want to accomplish, and I just can't run the risk of having anything screw that up.

It just makes my heart hurt to think about it.

On Nov. 2, Ohio will vote on Issue 1, a state constitutional amendment that purports to simply ban same-sex marriage but actually goes much further. Ten other states -- Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon and Utah -- are also voting on anti-gay marriage amendments. They're all expected to pass, most by wide margins. Eight of the state amendments prohibit domestic partnerships or any other public benefits or recognition for gay couples. But as a headline on the front page of Columbus Dispatch recently said, "Issue 1 wording makes it the strictest." Polls show support for it hovering above 60 percent.

Issue 1 is only two sentences long, but there's a world of uncertainty in it. While the first sentence simply decrees that marriage is between a man and a woman, the second says, "This state 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 effect of marriage."

Comments

[cathboblet.livejournal.com]

GAH! I hate this shit! What the freaking hell -- no marriage, and what's more no freakin' anything . . . no benefits, no protection, no nothing. What?

One of the things I dislike most about trying to have a reasoned debate about marriage in all its forms is that the pro-multiple forms side doesn't distill down into a soundbite. Opponents of marriage as anything but man/woman get to say exactly that -- "marriage is between a man and a woman" and so many people have only experienced marriage as exactly that that they believe it and don't give it another thought.

But that's one heck of an asshatted twisting of history. Marriage in the American tradition was never between men and women but between a Lord and Wife. It was all about power relations and protecting the state, not some moral or religious order . . . la la la . . . preaching to the choir here I know . . . but mercy, I want to take some good ole eighteenth and nineteenth-century legal texts and wrap them around the metaphoric necks of people who keep spouting such ignorance.

Fear is such a cancer.

[judecorp.livejournal.com]

I wish that every person out there knew someone like you who could combat the whole "history of traditional marriage in America" stuff. (I think it's even funnier coming from a Brit!)

And I think you're right about the soundbite, especially since it's so easy to tell people that the
"amendment supports marriage between a man and a woman" without talking about all of the legal intricacies contained within, like refusal of domestic partner benefits or any recognitions that may be given to married people. It's just SO! MUCH! MORE! than just protecting /some/ individuals' religious beliefs on who should be in committed relationships.

I just wish people would get their heads out of their asses and realize that there are PEOPLE at stake, there are CHILDREN at stake, and knee-jerk legislations like these are pushing people back into that "wow, it must be so sad/hard/challenging to be queer" mentality that seems to make people utter terrible sentiments like, "If I could take a pill to be straight, I would." WTF???!

And I know I am preaching to the very same choir here, but it just burns me up that I am in such a weird limbo here. Because while I was actively discriminated against in Ohio I always felt comfortable showing my love in public. And while I am legally protected in Massachusetts I find us holding hands less, displaying affection publicly less. And being broke.

It's just not fair.

[cathboblet.livejournal.com]

I think we like to preach to each other because we look so fine in our fetching choir robes. Oh yes we do.

It isn't fair. It's based on such ignorance and manipulation. It makes me nutty and encourages my violent streak, which I'd prefer the world didn't encourage ;).

And I just blew off steam about at least part of it in my own journal. =D Who knew a PhD was actually going to come in *useful* some day?

[judecorp.livejournal.com]

Of course I love the post. And while I imagine that you would look fetching in your robes, I also imagine that your robes would look better on the floor by my bed. ;)