Redefining marriage troubles the waters
October 31, 2012 · Updated 6:13 PM
I am voting to reject R-74.
What the good citizens of Washington are about to do is equivalent to changing the course of the flow of the Columbia River. It certainly can be argued that the river of traditional marriage has been polluted by far too many selfish, male husbands who have oppressed their female wives, often leaving mothers alone to care for their children. And even greater damage has been done to children in the loss of stability in their homes.
However, rather than clean up the Great River of Marriage and put effective efforts into rebuilding strong and stable heterosexual marriages, the demand has gone out: "Reroute the Columbia. The traditional route is not working very well."
Fellow citizens, this is equivalent to what our state is about to do. Rerouting the River of Marriage.
But of one thing I am certain, if in actuality some group were demanding a re-routing of the traditional flow of the Columbia River, another group would counter-demand that there be a thorough environmental impact review of the consequences and implications of such a change. But sadly, our Legislature glibly ignored such a request for a cultural impact review of the consequences and implications of redefining marriage. Our legislators who voted to impose a new definition of marriage on Washington did not do their homework and absolutely refused to do a serious study of the longterm ramifications of redefining marriage in Washington.
However, you and I can put a halt to this ill-advised decision by voting to reject R-74. Haven't you had enough of the folly of saying, "We have to pass the bill so we can find out what's in it." If for no other reason than not having honest data showing the impact redefining marriage would have on Washington, we must vote to reject R-74.
– Dan Folden