Voting on Marriage in 2012 toward Family Restoration

Maryland, Minnesota, Maine, and Washington State will all vote on marriage on November 6th. Each state has a different approach to addressing marriage expansion or marriage protection, and understanding these various marriage amendments can be confusing. In this post we'd like to remove some of that confusion.
Previously this blog has informed our readers on this issue after I was asked to write a JURIST.com post on the matter. You can read that post at http://regentfamilyrestoration.blogspot.com/2012/09/marriage-and-election-2012.html, and you can access the JURIST.com piece at http://jurist.org/forum/2012/06/lynne-kohm-marriage-referendum.php. We've also discussed the implications here for voters concerned about racial fairness and marriage, and you can read that post at http://regentfamilyrestoration.blogspot.com/search?q=African+american+voters.
With these votes on marriage in four particular states fast approaching, we've tried to give you a quick glimpse below. Some important definitions include:
"Marriage": that legal lifetime union between one man and one woman unrelated and of suitable age.
"Marriage expansion": that union of two men or two women that may be known as same sex marriage, or a civil union, or a domestic partnership, with the objective of expanding marriage as it is commonly known to include partners of the same gender.  Marriage expansion often includes other ways than gender similarity to expand marriage (i.e. by eliminating minimum age, or increasing the number of partners, or the elimination of affinity or consanguinity norms), but in the November 2012 election the term generally means expansion of marriage to include same sex couples.  Marriage expansion in one area opens the door to expansion in these other areas, as currently evidenced in other nations. For a good discussion on how polygamy is the new frontier for marriage expansion see http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/polygamy-may-be-hot-but-in-marriage-threes-still-a-crowd/2012/10/05/daf41284-0e39-11e2-a310-2363842b7057_story.html?hpid=z5. This blog has featured similar warnings; see our post on this about the US and Canada at  http://regentfamilyrestoration.blogspot.com/search?q=polygamy.
Here's a quick summary for voters in each state:
Maryland – The pro-marriage campaign asks you to vote "AGAINST" Question 6. The marriage expansion campaign asks you to vote "FOR" Question 6. Some resources for Christian voters can be found at http://www.marylandmarriagealliance.org/church-resources/

Minnesota – The pro-marriage campaign asks you to vote "YES" for the marriage amendment. The marriage expansion campaign asks you to vote "NO," against the amendment. Resources for faith-based voters can be found at http://www.mnpastorsformarriage.com/.

Maine – The pro-marriage campaign asks you to vote "NO" on Question 1. Marriage expansionists ask that you vote "YES" on Question 1. Christian resources can be found at http://protectmarriagemaine.com/church-tools/.

Washington – The pro-marriage campaign asks you to "REJECT" R-74. The marriage expansion campaign asks you to "ACCEPT" R-74. Resources for Christian voters are available at http://www.preservemarriagewashington.com/churchresources.php.

Any voter's Marriage Amendment position will reflect his or her position not only on marriage's definition, but on what that voter hopes marriage will look like in another generation, and on that voter's hopes for family restoration. Marriage expansion hinders family restoration because it dilutes the meaning and substance of marriage. To read more about this phenomenon specifically, see m
y scholarship on how marriage is altered by the proliferation of domestic partnerships on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) at
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=269418.  To read more about accuracy and fairness in discussing marriage and homosexuality see my article on this at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=317699.  
This November be an informed voter can assist you in wisely voting your values on marriage looking toward stronger marriages and stronger families on the road to societal family restoration.  

1 comment:

  1. With the recent decision of the Supreme Court to hear argument on DOMA and Prop 8 from Cal. the states may no longer have a say in what qualifies as marriage and what does not. Based on the Lawrence and previous SDP cases I think the court will rule for marriage expansion. Such a ruling would effectively make the states role in the definition of marriage irrelevant.