Culture & Cosmos
Volume 3, Number 14 | November 9, 2005
|
Dear Colleague, Very good news out of Texas yesterday. Texas voters overwhelmingly voted for a constitutional amendment saying marriage can only be between a man and a woman. Texas is the 18th state to pass such a constitutional amendment. Spread the word. Yours sincerely, Austin Ruse President |
|
|
Texas Voters Overwhelmingly Endorse
Traditional Marriage
Texas voters continued the 18-state winning streak for traditional marriage by overwhelming supporting a constitutional amendment declaring marriage in Texas to be solely the union of a man and woman. The measure also forbids the state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical to or similar to marriage, including such relationships created outside of Texas. Proposition 2 passed with more than 76 percent of the vote, among the highest in the nation. The initiative came under criticism from some who said it was too broadly written and could be used to apply to relationships that voters had not intended. Almost every major newspaper came out against the proposition including the daily papers from Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Austin and Fort Worth. But voters were clearly not affected as the measure passed in every major metropolitan area except Austin. Texas already has a defense of marriage act making same-sex marriage illegal in the state. Supporters of the amendment said Proposition 2 ensures that activist judges will not be able to invalidate that law on the grounds that it is against the state constitution as was done in Massachusetts. The amendment also prevents judges from trying to force the state to recognize the validity of a same-sex marriage performed out of state. Meanwhile in California, voters narrowly rejected an initiative requiring parents be notified before their minor daughters could receive an abortion. Fifty-two percent of voters rejected Proposition 73 following an intense and well funded campaign against the measure that was backed by organizations like Planned Parenthood. In addition to requiring parental notification, the initiative would have required a 48-hour waiting period before a minor could obtain an abortion. Proposition 73 would not have required that a parent give consent to an abortion and contained a provision that would have allowed a judge to waive notification "based on clear, convincing evidence of minor's maturity or best interests." Opposition to the proposition was spearheaded by an organization named "Campaign for Teen Safety" which received more than $2.5 million from various chapters of Planned Parenthood. They ran ads saying that Proposition 73 would endanger teenage girls by possibly forcing them into trying to obtain illegal abortions or trying to perform abortions on themselves. The ad closed with a mother saying, "I'm voting no on Prop 73 because our daughters' safety comes first." California would have been the 35th state to require some form of parental consent or notification before allowing a minor to have an abortion and the proposition even had the backing the of pro-abortion Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. It is likely the general unpopularity of Schwarzenegger had a negative impact on the initiative which has broad appeal throughout the United States. |
|
|
Culture of Life Foundation 1413 K Street, NW, Suite 1000 Washington DC 20005 Phone: (202) 289-2500 Fax: (202) 289-2502 E-mail: clf@culture-of-life.org Website: http://www.culture-of-life.org |