Posted on 04/28/2004 7:07:42 AM PDT by rface
Both houses of the Missouri General Assembly have passed versions of a proposed amendment to the state constitution banning gay marriage. If language in the two bills can be compromised, the resolution will go to the voters.
The governor has no power to veto constitutional amendments. In this case, perhaps that suits him just fine. According to polls, most people oppose gay marriage. The House passed its version 124-19. A disturbing amount of momentum pushes this unfortunate proposal.
Missouri law already forbids gay marriage, but proponents of the amendment want a more permanent prohibition, and in today’s rush to judgment too few people seem to make a distinction between a law on the books and an amendment to the constitution. At the state level, we trifle with our constitution too much. In particular, it should not be used to establish morally based prohibitions in such a personal area of decision-making.
Moreover, the whole gay marriage issue is hypocritical. Courts are affirming the civil right of legal association to gay people while not yet doing the same for an association labeled "marriage." Single-sex "civil unions" are all right, but "marriage," with all the same legal implications, is not. This distinction surely will not prevail in the long run, but at the moment it is in danger of being codified in constitutional law. Even though gay people can enter into legal marriage-type associations, the constitution would say it may not be called "marriage."
Does faint hope exist this woeful move might not happen? Maybe legislative negotiators and their respective bodies won’t agree on final language, providing them with the best of worlds. They can posture and pander and pass bills but then never actually make law. Or, if the thing actually does get on the ballot, anonymous voters might know better than to vote "yes" even though some might not want to reveal such a leaning to pollsters.
A judge has ruled that this amendment can be placed on the November ballot. This is being fought hard by the dimocrats because they think it will generate a high turnout of GWB voters at that time.
Missouri is a huge battle ground state, and this decision is being appealed to the high court. Stay tuned.
What other states are proposing marriage amendments in November?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.