I have to agree with those who will vote No on Amendment 2, which would codify into the Constitution a ban on same-sex marriage. But I hadn’t expected to.
Although some have argued otherwise, marriage is not some “evolving paradigm.” Not at its gendered core. Relationships evolve, of course, but not the institution in its most fundamental form. I’m still surprised, frankly, that needs stating.
I thought former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney summed it up succinctly a couple of years ago. Marriage, he noted, is “rooted in the history, culture and tradition of civil society. It predates our Constitution and our nation by millennia. The institution of marriage was not created by government, and it should not be redefined by government.”
But back to Amendment 2. If only it didn’t invalidate other unions — those which are the “substantial equivalent” of marriage. That’s a wording fraught with societal mischief by some future court. Just say no to such legal parsing.