I\'m off to Vote

"The constitutional amendment providing that marriage in this state consists only of the union of one man and one woman and prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage."

If this passes and thus Texas's gay/bi/poly communities lose, it's not clear what we lose. If we win, gay marriage is already illegal, and its not clear what we win. But win or lose if the vote is close, (as we are expected to lose) it will say something about Texas. It will say that the tide is turning.

Now I could stay home and whine about the futility of voting, but I'd hate for our dear politicians to think it was politically safe to continue proposing discriminatory legislation against minority groups, all because a few thousand individuals such as my self decided to not bother with the democratic process.

We'll probably lose in a landslide, but groundswells have to start somewhere. I won't stay home when dear friends are pouring their heart, souls, and money into defeating this amendment. I won't stay home even if it turns out that I'm wrong about voting.

Share this

On the Texas Same-Sex

On the Texas Same-Sex Marriage Ban Initiative
--Austin American-Statesman,

Now I could stay home and

Now I could stay home and whine about the futility of voting, but I’d hate for our dear politicians to think it was politically safe to continue proposing discriminatory legislation against minority groups, all because a few thousand individuals such as my self decided to not bother with the democratic process.

I predict that it will end up being very politically safe - and that your vote will not change that outcome one iota.

I can't believe Texas, my

I can't believe Texas, my former home, really wants to prohibit the state from "creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage." The only legal status identical to marriage would be marriage, so essentially the proposal is to prevent the state from legally recognizing marriage.

Having been away from the state for a while, I missed the political campaign on this one. Was there a bumper sticker that said "When marriage is outlawed, only outlaws will be married"?

"I predict that it will end

"I predict that it will end up being very politically safe - and that your vote will not change that outcome one iota."

And there I was thinking you didn't like to waste your time with futile gestures. :twisted:

Yeah, I guess I'll go vote,

Yeah, I guess I'll go vote, too. It's rational in the sense that it makes me feel good (though for no good reason).

Incidentally, where's Micha Ghertner these days?

Voting makes you feel

Voting makes you feel good?!? That kind of sounds like a personal issue not a rationale for voting, but keep working on it. You might try some of the reasons I mentioned in my post, like being a part of a broad demographic trend etc.

I’d hate for our dear

I’d hate for our dear politicians to think it was politically safe to continue proposing discriminatory legislation against minority groups

But all welfare/subsidy programs (i.e., state marriage) are inherently discriminatory; some people get them and others don't. Am I being discriminated against because I don't get the same "right" to a sugar subsidy as a sugarcane grower?

I'm not in favor of state

I'm not in favor of state licensed marriage. This amendment however was specifically aimed and designed to effect the legal status of non-traditional marriages, i.e. gay couples. It was unneccesary because gay marriage is already illegal in the state, and therefore the only real purpose of it was to make conservative politicians look good by attacking a minority group. I think its kind of convoluted to compare that to sugar subsidies. However in the interest of fairness I'm certainly in favor of ridding the planet of all government subsidies to businesses and industries of any kind.