Last year, the Washington State Supreme Court ruled that the Washington version of the Defense of Marriage Act was Constitutional because, according to the state Constitution, marriage was reserved to be between only a man and a woman for the purpose of procreation.
Yes, it sounds exactly as dumb as the reason given by the people who want special rights solely because of who they like the get nekkid with, but it put a stop to these stupid rulings in my state being shoved down my throat by a court system.
Because they think they have a sense of humor, the people who want laws written to cover their emotions have stepped up with Citizen’s Initiative #957.
I-957 states that if a couple does not procreate within three years of their wedding day, they can face forced annulment by the state.
Yes, read that again. No, it won’t make any more sense.
Here is a quote from the leader of the group who filed I-957
Gregory Gadow, who filed I-957 last month, said the three-year timeframe was arbitrary.
“We did toy with the idea of (requiring) procreation before marriage,” he said. “We didn’t want to piss off the fundamentalists too much.”
Gadow said that if the group’s initiatives were passed, the Supreme Court would be forced to strike them down as unconstitutional, which he believes would weaken the original ruling upholding the Defense of Marriage Act.
But he said he highly doubts any of the initiatives will pass, and that they are being done “in the spirit of political street theater.”
Well, theater is one of the things the same-sex marriage crowd is good at. I just don’t like it being brought in as a political tool. You’d hate to see the acts the paper mache puppets for this issue are doing.
Myself, I just like practicing making kids too much to actually commit to the raising of them. Smelly, noisy, unreasonable, and if they’re anymore like me than that, I may just have to kill them (and I’m told that is a crime). So no kids for me.
Go right ahead, annul my marriage, ya heiny humpin’ gaybees, the wife and I will just get married every four years. We liked the gifts we got the first time around, so it’ll be like a “special anniversary†when that three-year mark arrives.
Plus, can you imagine the amount of money going to JoPs and ministers if this passes! They’ll be swimming in cash!
That’s a very dangerous perversion of the initiative system. Writing a proposition you know is unconstitutional must be SOME sort of legal fault, and if it isn’t it should be.
Doesn’t the Secretary of State have some control over initiative content?
One of two things will happen: either the Sec. State will tell these people to piss up a rope with their initiative, or it will get on the ballot due to the political back-scratching involved.
What all involved don’t realize is that there is a possible outcome of the Real Supreme Court ruling that the WA initiative system is seriously flawed, which will force the Legislature to re-write it, AND THEY WON’T, because all the big-government freaks HATE the initiative system with a purple passion (that’s why only 10 states have a serious form of it).
This guy needs to be slapped down with a nuclear bitch-slap for even trying this. It just goes to show that bedfellows make the WORST politics.
From the way my parents speak, the Washington government largely ignores initiatives unless they are on something the government was going to do anywise… Either way, I could certainly live with a honeymoon every three years.
At any rate, the judicial system ought to have a system in place that allows them to put people in contempt of the state when they intentionally propose legislation, initiatives, or whatever that they, themselves, admit are idiotic.