« Texas Says Goodbye to Molly Ivins | Main | Day Eight of the Libby Trial - Libby's Tapes Released »

February 05, 2007


I don't think their signature gathering campaign is gonna get real far, but ya just gotta like the chutzpah of Gregory Gadow, who's floating I-957, which proposes to make procreation a requirement for legal marriage.

But, no, he's not a right wing whacko.  Gadow explains:

On July 26, 2006, the Washington Supreme Court issued their ruling on
Andersen v. King County, decided jointly with Castle v. Washington.
These cases sought to overturn Washington’s Defense of Marriage Act, which
bans same-sex couples from the hundreds of rights, protections and privileges
which state law provides through marriage. In their ruling, the Supreme Court
claimed a “legitimate state interest” in defining marriage
exclusively for the purpose of procreation and child-rearing. The justices
then used this interest to declare that same-sex couples are properly barred
from marriage because they are incapable of procreating.

In response, a group of concerned citizens formed the Washington Defense of
Marriage Alliance this past August. Our agenda is to shine a very bright light
on the injustice and prejudice that underlie the Andersen decision by
giving that decision the full force of law. Over the next few years, we will
propose three initiatives to the people, each focusing on a different aspect
of Andersen. The first initiative will make procreation a requirement
for legal marriage. The second would prohibit divorce or separation when a
married couple has children together. The third would make having a child
together the equivalent of marriage.

Each of the initiatives we get passed will, no doubt, be struck down as
unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court. Good; that is our ultimate goal.
Each ruling against these initiatives will also be a ruling against the basis
for keeping the state’s Defense of Marriage Act. Eventually,
Andersen will fall apart under the weight of judicial opinion, and
equal marriage – the marriage which we seek to defend – shall become a reality
in this state.

They're trying to raise $300,000 to fund their signature gathering campaign.  That suggests that they don't have much money in the bank.  Which means I think they're unlikely to make it.  Worse, I think they'll get a couple of days' worth of headlines, a few op-eds and then they will sink without a trace. 

But I wish them luck.  Maybe they'll pick up an endorsement from Rev. Ken Hutcherson or that wingbat who runs Mars Church.  That could be fun.

Posted by Jon Stahl on February 5, 2007 at 09:09 PM in Ballot Initiatives | Permalink


Post a comment