Children Required For Married Couples... By Law?
Wow. A very strange way of going about social change.
An initiative filed by proponents of same-sex marriage would require heterosexual couples to have kids within three years or else have their marriage annulled.
Initiative 957 was filed last month by Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance. That group was formed last summer after the state supreme court upheld Washington's ban on same-sex marriage.
Under the measure, marriage would be limited to men and women who are able to have children. Couples would be required to prove they can have children in order to get a marriage license, and if they did not have children within three years, their marriage would be subject to annulment.
All other marriages would be defined as "unrecognized" and people in those marriages would be ineligible to receive any marriage benefits.
Supporters must gather more than 224,000 valid signatures by July 6 to put the initiative on the November ballot.
According to the group's Web site, organizers hope that the supreme court will strike down the initiatives as unconstitutional, weakening the basis for the same-sex marriage ban.
"And at the very least, it should be good fun to see the social conservatives who have long screamed that marriage exists for the sole purpose of procreation be forced to choke on their own rhetoric," it says.
Labels: ballot measure, constitutional amendment, washington
This entry was posted
on Monday, February 05, 2007 at 4:46 PM.
Want to discuss? Leave a comment below.
Byso glad you posted this - this one is absolutely brilliant.....
we have to take the "religion" out of the picture. if people want to have a religious marriage, go for it and have your church perform it, regardless of what the government thinks.
but if you want the government/legal aspect, get a domestic partnership (regardless of gender mix).
who cares about the word (i don't), it's just a word!
and i'm all for forcing kids if that's the only purpose of a marriage :-) (even though they are doing it tongue in cheek here)
By
I think the point needs to be made, but I don't care for the method. This will eat up taxpayer time and money, and is very easy to misinterpret. It may alienate people who should be our allies--the childless/childfree mixed-sex couples that are so often insulted by anti-SSM rhetoric.
By
how/where do we sign up?
By
@cracker...
Don't worry. Most of us hetero non-breeders are savvy enough to get the message here. I mean, we're at above average intelligence---we've decided not to have kids, remember? =P
I think this is a fantastic idea.
» Post a Comment