Monday, November 02, 2009

Sometimes voting makes me sad

Tomorrow is voting day. One of the items on the ballot is Referendum Measure 71 which is Washington voters' chance to APPROVE (or reject) the domestic partnership bill (SB 5688) that the Legislature already passed and the governor already signed. The bill would expand the rights of registered same-sex and senior domestic partners to be equivalent to those of married spouses.

I voted to approve because, you know, duh.

There was no question which way I was going to vote on this issue, so I'm not even sure why I bothered to read the voters' pamphlet. But I did, and this is (part of) what I read:
"REJECT SENATE BILL 5688 TO PROTECT CHILDREN!
SB 5688 redefines terms such as "husband" and "wife" to be construed as "gender neutral." The new law will confuse children and likely result in public schools influencing children to accept a new definition of the "family unit" so that same-sex partners will be a recognized norm."
Um. Okay. I see your nonsensical argument and raise you three sarcastic responses.
  1. Redefining terms to be construed as gender neutral? Does this mean they're going to USE A DIFFERENT PRONOUN?! In the writing of a law that NONE OF US WILL EVER EVEN READ?!

  2. Confuse children? Yes, I suspect that it will. Laws are confusing and difficult to read in their entirety without falling asleep. Maybe you should read your children something more age appropriate instead. I hear the Harry Potter series is very popular with the young folk.

  3. Accepting a new definition of "family unit?" That IS a tough one. I remember when my son came home wondering why his preschool friend had two dads, and I had to, you know, talk to him about it. I had to tell him that families can be built in many different ways. I had to tell him that only some families have a mom and a dad, while others have two dads or two moms, or just a mom or just a dad, or step-moms or step-dads, or grandparents instead of moms or dads. And then we hid huddled in a corner and cried into our clenched fists because the mere idea was that disturbing.
I would also like to point out that rejecting 5688 "to protect children" really isn't going to work out so well for the children who turn out to be gay.

Please vote to approve Referendum 71 because, you know, duh.

5 comments:

BeautifulWreck said...

I have surrounded my children with loving, committed, monogamous gays (who knew they existed!) My kids have no problem understanding same sex relationships or families. In today's society families are so different I really do not see what the big deal is.

adrienzgirl said...

We had a similar vote here in redneck hell aka the bible belt aka FL last year. It passed. They used the same tired scare tactics for the uneducated southern republicans who still fly their confederate flags in their front yards too. Makes me sick.

My children know better. We don't discriminate on race, creed, color, religious affiliation or sexual orientation. We are all people and should treat others with respect.

thatgirlkelly said...

I'm for any argument that uses, "duh" as a means for making the case. Word.

Not a soccer mom said...

Absolutely love the way you put this..wish I could speak as eloquently on the issue...because i feel the same way.
It is not the children who we worry about.
Children understand from birth until they are taught otherwise that all of us are just the same.. only different. And there is nothing wrong with different, unless your parents told you there was

T said...

Greatness. Absolute greatness.

Duh.

Related Posts Widget for Blogs by LinkWithin
 

Made by Lena