Unintended Consequences: Yeardly Love and Marshall-Newman.
I hate to say I told you so, but I ABSOLUTELY told you so. If you don’t want to click through, here’s what I said on Friday, November 3rd, 2006:
It’s that time again
Ladies and Gentlemen, we have less than a week until election day. This year, it’s more important than ever that you get out there and vote.
(A paragraph on Judy Feder).
(A paragraph on Jim Webb, ending in a comment about Gay Rights = Civil Rights)
Speaking of which, I’m voting “NO!!!!” on ballot question 1 which reads:
Question: Shall Article I (the Bill of Rights) of the Constitution of
Virginia be amended to state:
“That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions.This Commonwealth 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 effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of
marriage.”?Now, the first paragraph is foul on its own. Homophobia enshrined in a state constitution. It makes me sick.
The second paragraph is also quite worrisome. In Ohio, some courts have decided that similar language in their constitution bars unmarried women from getting protective orders against their abusive live-in boyfriends. It could invalidate living wills, roommate agreements, custody agreements between people who were never married.
Our lovely State’s Attorney (an elected Republican) {OH! He’s our GOVERNOR now!} sneers at our concerns and says that the legislature and he have written opinions and intent statements that they don’t mean this to apply to straight people. Or elderly aunts. Or abused girlfriends. But these are the same people who fought to get strict constructionist judges on benches all over our state. And if I remember correctly, strict constructionists are not known for giving a hoot about the legislative intent. They go by the words in the document.
Heck, even the extremely conservative Richmond Times Dispatch is against it.
Seriously, people. I’ve been angry about this for four years now. When civil rights don’t apply to EVERYBODY, we end up finding that they don’t apply to ANYBODY.
Can’t forget his shameful attempt after the election to get funding pulled from the Loudoun Abused Women’s Shelter – because they had the audacity to advocate for the best interests of their clients and their ability to carry out their own mission. The nerve of those uppity women.
I will see if I can find links. As I recall, his minion Donny Ferguson did a piss-poor job defending his boss in comments to one of the local papers. There was also commentary by some local characters to the effect of “those women shouldn’t be involved in sexual relationships outside of marriage anyway. There are consequences for sin.” We need to expose these people every time they raise their criminal heads.
And go read the comments on Vivian’s post while we’re at it.
It is cold comfort being right so long after the fact.
God bless and be with the families and my UVA community.