There is some cheating going on about Proposition 2. You've probably heard the news about how a former legislator is heading a group opposing the proposition with deceptive recorded phone calls. The opposition line is "Don't risk it, vote against it". It reminds me of Horse Feathers, a Marx Brothers movie (reminds me of the Dems in Congress too).
I don't know what they have to say,
it makes no difference anyway -
whatever it is, I'm against it!
No matter what it is or who commenced it,
I'm against it!
Your proposition may be good,
but let's have one thing understood -
whatever it is, I'm against it!
And even when you've changed it or condensed it,
I'm against it!
I'm opposed to it.
On general principles I'm opposed to it.
For months before my son was born,
I used to yell from night to morn -
"Whatever it is, I'm against it!"
And I've kept yelling since I first commenced it,
"I'm against it!"
You can also see UT-Pan American peppered with signs with the same cryptic message "Don't risk it, vote against it." They don't tell you what "it" is. The whole campaign is based on the premise that the proposition is flawed and will end up changing traditional marriage. Of course, this is a bunch of horse feathers. The campaigners have no interest in preserving traditional marriage. They simply want to leave the door open for gay marriage. If they have to lie, obfuscate, deceive, or mislead to attain that effect, it's being done. The AG Greg Abbott had to step in and rule against the deceptive phone campaign.
I was reading an article that claims that the issue has traction with the under 30 crowd. Amendments usually get votes from an average age of 58, it states in the same paragraph. Much opposition comes from under 30. I used to be 30 or younger as of a year ago. I'm 31 now. Let me tell you about the under 30 crowd. They don't vote. Sure, you'll have the occasional voter in their twenties. As a core constituency, under 30s are a waste of campaign resources. They talk a good game, but they don't vote. What happened in the last presidential election with all the Hollywood stars, musicians, and other celebrities siding with John Kerry? The celebs were going to "Rock the Vote" to get young people to vote Democrat. If you listened to MTV, you would have thought you were listening to a campaign arm for the Kerry people. Did the youth show up? No. It was a waste of time and money.
Gen X, my people, and Gen Y don't buy into the marketing. We tend to be a bit more cynical. We'll go to the concert to hear music. We don't care what Ashton Kutcher thinks, we just like to see him act like a dumbass. I liked one Dixie Chicks song, "Landslide". Then the fat one decides to disrespect the President. Laura Ingraham says it best, "Shut up and sing". I could go on about some of the nitwit entertainers out there like Bruce Springsteen, Kanye West, Barbara Streisand, Leonardo Dicaprio, Donald Sutherland, Cameron Diaz, and many others. If you hear the dribble they speak when they talk about politics, you feel embarrassed FOR them. Who the heck cares what they think? Just entertain us. Take my money and perform. To quote Kurt Cobain, "here we are now, entertain us".
So, not only are the opponents of Proposition 2 wasting their time on a skimpy voter base, they are misleading the very same voter base. That's real genius.
What you should do.
You should vote for Proposition 2. The reason for this is that it only formalizes what already is. To be dramatic, it's like a Proposition that requires the State of Texas to recognize male children as "boys" and females as "girls". Similarly, this proposition codifies marriage as being between a man and a woman. It rules out any other variations of the concept and rules out any laws that result in similar recognition. In English, it means it can't be a marriage between a man and a man, a man and a goat, a man and his two roomates. In addition, also in English, there can't be a "civil union" type of status or recognition because it results in something similar to marriage. If you are against the proposition, don't worry. This is just for an amendment. The Texas Constitution can be reamended if sometime in the future Texans decide that we simply can't continue civilization without the ability to marry our livestock, a friend of the same gender, or group marriages. If future Texans decide that these types of unions are absolutely necessary for the good of Texas families, you'll see legislators running to Austin to propose the next amendment. In the meantime, let the pro-family crowd have their way. Or, are you anti-family?
Comments