Here in Virginia, debate’s heating up over a proposed amendment to the state constitution banning gay marriage. This, in addition to the two laws now on the books banning the practice. What’s particularly insidious about this attempt is the language, which applies to unmarried heterosexual couples as well as gays, and seems to be written to prohibit any type of contract between unmarried couples at all, including custody contracts, wills, and, for example, familial visitation rights in hospitals. The measure not only prevents the state from passing any sort of contract rights between non-hetero and/or non-married couples, it prohibits any cities or counties within Virginia from doing the same.

That language:

That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions.

This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status
to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.

The punchline? If it passes, the above language will be added to the Virginia Bill of Rights.

Many have speculated that the amendment’s place on the ballot will draw an otherwise sluggish religious right to the polls, helping George Allen in his close race against Jim Webb. Maybe Allen netroots organizer and libertarian John Henke can explain the “Jeffersonian” or libertarian merits of this amendment, which Allen supports. I’m having a hard time seeing them.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 27th, 2006 at 2:53 pm by Radley Balko and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.