A couple of other observations on yesterday’s vote here in Missouri to amend the state constitution:
- The St. Louis Post-Dispatch referred to the vote as a “gay marriage ban”. This is a subtle spin on the truth, intended, I think, to make the reader think that a “yes” vote was a vote to take away state-approved marriage to homosexual couples. That is not the case. Missouri law already defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The amendment passed yesterday just prevents an activist judge from declaring that law unconstitutional.
- The P-D’s last poll before yesterday’s vote indicated that the amendment was favored, 56% to 38%, with about 6% undecided. This morning, with 98% of the precincts reporting, the actual margin is about 71% to 29%. Either the poll was skewed by the nature of the question, or people answer differently when asked in public because they’re afraid of being labeled intolerant.
- The point that stands out is that the amendment passed so overwhelmingly even with a stronger turnout among Democratic voters than Republicans. Clearly a solid majority in Missouri–of all political stripes–recognizes that homosexual marriage is not good for society. We don’t want the U.S. to follow the lead of the Scandinavian countries, where as many as two-thirds of children are now born to unmarried parents.
This issue isn’t about making marriage available to homosexuals anyway. There are no legal benefits offered to married people that can’t be had by homosexual couples. The whole battle is over “mainstreaming” gays, conferring legitimacy on the homosexual lifestyle.
In Missouri we say, politely but firmly, “Not here.”