In The News: Prop 8 Judge's Ruling
Aug. 6th, 2010 12:22 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rabid1stI was just reading through the ruling from the judge that overturned Prop 8 in California.
Here is a link if you want to read it yourself...
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35377082/Judge-Overturns-California-s-Proposition-8
But I was just sort of stunned by the idea of the proponents of Prop 8 making the following argument about marriage.
Proponents’ procreation argument, distilled to its
essence, is as follows: the state has an interest in encouraging
sexual activity between people of the opposite sex to occur in
stable marriages because such sexual activity may lead to pregnancy
and children, and the state has an interest in encouraging parents
to raise children in stable households. Tr 3050:17-3051:10. The
state therefore, the argument goes, has an interest in encouraging
all opposite-sex sexual activity, whether responsible or
irresponsible, procreative or otherwise, to occur within a stable
marriage, as this encourages the development of a social norm that
opposite-sex sexual activity should occur within marriage.
I would bet you many of these supporters are out there saying they don't want any government involvement in their lives. They don't want the government interfering with things like health care or safety issues on oil wells. It is too much for the government to want to tax companies with off-shore accounts designed to avoid taxation (with the express purpose of using those collected taxes to fund health care for 9-11 first responders). No, that sort of government interference bothers them...but wanting to stop people from building a place of worship or have me married and pregnant by order of the the law...that's the type of government interference they are happy to support. It's not just that I hate their views on gay men and women. I hate this view of heterosexual couples and marriage, too.
Rae
Here is a link if you want to read it yourself...
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35377082/Judge-Overturns-California-s-Proposition-8
But I was just sort of stunned by the idea of the proponents of Prop 8 making the following argument about marriage.
Proponents’ procreation argument, distilled to its
essence, is as follows: the state has an interest in encouraging
sexual activity between people of the opposite sex to occur in
stable marriages because such sexual activity may lead to pregnancy
and children, and the state has an interest in encouraging parents
to raise children in stable households. Tr 3050:17-3051:10. The
state therefore, the argument goes, has an interest in encouraging
all opposite-sex sexual activity, whether responsible or
irresponsible, procreative or otherwise, to occur within a stable
marriage, as this encourages the development of a social norm that
opposite-sex sexual activity should occur within marriage.
I would bet you many of these supporters are out there saying they don't want any government involvement in their lives. They don't want the government interfering with things like health care or safety issues on oil wells. It is too much for the government to want to tax companies with off-shore accounts designed to avoid taxation (with the express purpose of using those collected taxes to fund health care for 9-11 first responders). No, that sort of government interference bothers them...but wanting to stop people from building a place of worship or have me married and pregnant by order of the the law...that's the type of government interference they are happy to support. It's not just that I hate their views on gay men and women. I hate this view of heterosexual couples and marriage, too.
Rae