Prop. 2

[Sallad]

Ooh, you like to be naughty?

NEVER!... well, maybe sometimes.

 

[Queersetti]

Yeah sucks to be Texas. I could go on but I don't have words. I too am just waiting for the current generation to get too old to vote and the next generation to step up and start mopping up the mess.

There is a common saying in politics that "Demographics is destiny."

I think you are right, America is slowly outgrowing it's antiquaited attitudes about sexuality.

 

[Queersetti]

they would be cheating on each other n a very short time so what would it get you as a group??

Equality.

Any other questions?

 

[dizzylia]

Equality.

Any other questions?

Hah! I loved that. Thank you!

Here's a for giving me a much needed laugh today.

 

[lucky-E-leven]

I know it's late, but...

...the proposal wasn't a ban on gay marriage specifically, though it did just that by being passed.

November 8, 2005, Election
AMENDMENT NO. 2 (H.J.R. No. 6)

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.

SUMMARY: The proposed amendment would amend Article I, Texas Constitution, to declare that marriage in this state consists only of the union of one man and one woman, and to prohibit this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage. The joint resolution in which the amendment is proposed also includes a nonamendatory provision recognizing that persons may designate guardians, appoint agents, and use private contracts to adequately and properly appoint guardians and arrange rights relating to hospital visitation, property, and the entitlement to proceeds of life insurance policies, without the existence of any legal status identical or similar to marriage.

ARGUMENTS FOR: The equal protection clause and other provisions of the Texas Constitution are similar to those in other state constitutions and could be interpreted by courts to permit same‑sex marriage or to require the recognition of a legal status identical or similar to marriage. Adoption of the proposed amendment would prevent potential legal challenges to Texas' marriage statutes. The union of a man and a woman in the long‑standing institution of traditional marriage promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society. The state should ensure that the institution of traditional marriage cannot be undermined by a future court decision or statute of the Texas Legislature. The amendment would not discriminate against any person. Approval of the amendment by the voters would not prevent same‑sex couples from pursuing their lifestyles, but would only ensure that the union of same‑sex couples is not sanctioned by the state.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST: A constitutional prohibition is unnecessary because Texas law already prohibits same‑sex marriage and prohibits the recognition by the state or its political subdivisions of a same‑sex marriage, a civil union, or a right or claim asserted as a result of a same‑sex marriage or a civil union. A constitutional prohibition is inappropriate because it limits future state legislators' flexibility to promote the health and safety of families in whatever form those families may take. The language in the proposed amendment prohibiting the creation or recognition of "any legal status identical or similar to marriage" is vague. While the state's Defense of Marriage Act narrowly defines a "civil union," the amendment contains broader language that has the potential for being interpreted to nullify common law marriages or legal agreements, including powers of attorney and living wills, between unmarried persons.

Born and raised in the Lone Star State, I am in no way surprised by this measure or its 76% (For) - 23% (Against) passage. My partner and I live in a small town of about 1400, a mere 20 miles from President Bush's Crawford Ranch. I went and dutifully voted, and while I can almost assure you I was the only vote of its kind at my precinct, we've had no issues building a home and a life here with our children. All this means is that for now we have to spend a lot of time with attorneys to ensure our rights. It sucks, but there it is.

~lucky