I have not had the pleasure of lambasting a group of fundie nutballs for a long time. It looks like my streak is over. The Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance is off their rocker, total nutballs. The are proposing re-defining marriage to include proof of procreation or face annulment.
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - Proponents of same-sex marriage have introduced an initiative that would put a whole new twist on traditional unions between men and women: It would require heterosexual couples to have kids within three years or else have their marriages annulled.
Source: KOMO-TV - Seattle, Washington - News - I-957 would require married couples to have kids
Their website goes into greater detail:
If passed by Washington voters, the Defense of Marriage Initiative would:
- add the phrase, “who are capable of having children with one another” to the legal definition of marriage;
- require that couples married in Washington file proof of procreation within three years of the date of marriage or have their marriage automatically annulled;
- require that couples married out of state file proof of procreation within three years of the date of marriage or have their marriage classed as “unrecognized;”
- establish a process for filing proof of procreation; and
- make it a criminal act for people in an unrecognized marriage to receive marriage benefits.
I don't have time to look into what fundie nutball is driving this initiative; I'll leave this to the blogsphere.
I keep looking for the hidden camera...
*** Update ****
Via the wise and powerful Lord J-BarAs it turns out the Washington Defense of Marriage Aliance is pro smae-sex marriage. The purpose of Initiative 957 is to raise awareness. From their websitehmm... no fundies here. I think I need to dust off my fundar. It malfunctioned.
(Posted while listing to Sublime - Mary/Gib Salty Tears - off Acoustic)
3 comments:
As it turns out the Washington Defense of Marriage Aliance is pro smae-sex marriage. The purpose of Initiative 957 is to raise awareness. From their website:
"Absurd? Very. But there is a rational basis for this absurdity. By floating the initiatives, we hope to prompt discussion about the many misguided assumptions which make up the Andersen ruling. By getting the initiatives passed, we hope the Supreme Court will strike them down as unconstitional and thus weaken Andersen itself. And at the very least, it should be good fun to see the social conservatives who have long screamed that marriage exists for the sole purpose of procreation be forced to choke on their own rhetoric."
As Lord J-Bar says, it was made in irony. Look at this part you quoted:
Proponents of same-sex marriage have introduced an initiative
But honestly, it wouldn't have surprised me if this was a genuine attempt by the Family Values crowd to impose more of their stone age morality on society.
Post a Comment