Wednesday, March 25, 2009

XStryker's seven best reasons for you to oppose SB 27

Check out XStryker's call for action at Delawareliberal to help defeat SB 27, the start of a Constitutional amendment to not only make gay marriage permanently illegal in Delaware, but also to outlaw civil unions.

Here are his seven points for calling legislators:

Make sure to say the following when you call:

1. Gay Marriage is already not legal in Delaware - this bill is REALLY about Civil Unions .

2. Major state employers like DuPont, AstraZeneca, and the big banks offer Domestic Partnership benefits. This bill sends the wrong message in the current economy and will give their employees an incentive to live (and shop) in New Jersey or Maryland (which recognize Domestic Partnerships).

3. This bill is bad for the economy - it will chase away entrepenuers

4. According to Gallup, 55% of Americans support Civil Unions, and Delaware is more socially progressive than the average state.

5. It would be very unfair and undemocratic if the legislature amended the constitution to ban something that a majority of Delawareans support.

6. If this amendment passes, Delaware will become the ONLY state in the Northeast to ban Civil Unions.

Remember, they will ask for your name and address, so act civilly and don’t curse.

I realize that people of good conscience can disagree on the issue of same-sex marriage (although I have never been shown a convincing, fact-based argument for opposing it), but it is a basic Libertarian tenet that personal contracts should not, as a general rule, be regulated by the State.

This is massive State intrusion into the private lives of Delaware citizens.

Make the phone calls that Xstryker recommends. I have and I will continue to do so.


a most peculiar nature said...

Well, I don't read DL, so I guess I'll have to use my own gut.

I'm constructing my letter to Cloutier now, and will both e-mail and fax it today.

I don't do phone; that's Chainsaw's area.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps it's overly utopian of me, but I have strong objections to those arguments despite agreeing with the conclusions.

1 tactitly implies that banning gay marriage is acceptable.

2 and 3 are overly utilitarian. One could equally argue that we should ban civil unions since it would save employers money by not paying benefits.

4 and 5 suggest that it's just an issue of majority rules rather than an issue of rights. That may play with politicians, but I find it difficult to believe that many people would stop supporting equal rights if there was a 6% shift in public sentiment.

6 is just pointless. If it were the only state to outlaw slavery, that would be no reason to start permitting it.

If someone really believes that those are the seven (six?) best reasons to oppose criminalizing (certain) marriages/somewhat-similar-contracts-with-a-different-name, it seems to me that they're willing to lose the war for the sake of winning the battle.

By contrast, I have only one reason to oppose such a bill: it's morally wrong.

By all means, call in your opposition to the bill (since gradualism in practice is the best we'll ever see), but (assuming you have principles) have the integrity to make a principled stand.