InBloom InBloom

Voters in Tx: Marriage should be a union between a Man&Woman

▼

Voters in Tx: Marriage should be a union between a Man&Woman

from JoeUser Forums
We had amendment elections here in Tx. yesterday, with Amendment 2 being the most controversial. Amendment 2 states that "Marriage in Texas should be a union between one man and one woman." An overwhelming 75% of voters agreed with the Amendment. This makes Texas the 19th state to ban gay marriage in its constitution. State Rep. Warren Chisum, had this to say: "What it really says is people have deep moral convictions, and they're willing to stand up and say that at the ballot box."

Am I surprised with the results? No, of course not...we're talking about conservative Texas here. Am I disappointed? Yes I am. No disrespect intended to those who don't believe in gay unions, but to me, this is basically making someone's personal preferences, love lives, and relationships Everybody's business...how is that standing for "deep" moral convictions? They may as well have written an amendment as to what defines love. But hey, my opinion and vote on this thing didn't matter anyway, right...
4,988 views 29 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top
Kingbee, you make some decent points. Yes, parental rights can be established without marriage, but with marriage they are automatic. Even without marriage, who do people turn to to establish those rights? Their church? No, the courts (i.e, the government).

True, one doesn't need authority from the government to perform a marriage, but guess what, the marriage ritual isn't what makes couple married in the eyes of the law. That piece of paper, signed by someone given the authority to do so makes them married. All the ministers in the country can say "Dearly Beloved", "Til Death Do Us Part" and "I now pronounce you man and wife" all day long, but until that marriage license is signed, it's only words (from a practical standpoint).

Rights in general are a result of a We The People, The Community and The Government working together. Each have a role to play. If either part silences the role of the other too much, rights are threatened. Well, in the case of redefining marriage, if the government is silenced, rights are lost... just as if the government silenced the people, rights would be lost.
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
"That piece of paper, signed by someone given the authority to do so makes them married."


True, you can be married without a ceremony, but you can't be married without a license, at least legally.
Galactic Civilizations IV
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top
Does any one else realize that if passed, this will be the only amendment that takes rights away?
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top
" Does any one else realize that if passed, this will be the only amendment that takes rights away?"


Marriage is a managed, regulated license, not a right. No one prevents gay people from cohabitating, living monogomously for life, willing their inheritance to their partner,etc. THAT is a right. The government has the responsibility to regulate licenses, and marriage is one of them.