damnum absque injuria

September 20, 2006


Filed under:   by Xrlq @ 6:29 pm

A discussion over at Virginia “Centrist” got me to thinking. Am I the only person in the world who would (and did) vote yes on this:

Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in [this State / Commonwealth].

… but would (and will) vote no on this:

That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this [State / Commonwealth] and its political subdivisions.

This [State / Commonwealth] and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this [State / Commonwealth] or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.

Just call me Mr. Nuance.

4 Responses to “Splitter!”

  1. Joel B. Says:

    FWIW, it sounds like Pete Knight in keeping it simple got your vote, which maybe there are more like you, so smart move on his part.

  2. jjv Says:

    I note that the Attorney-General of Virginia has specifically issued an opinion that neither he nor his office will give the amendment the gloss you have given it on this website, and that it does not do what you say it will.

    I hate to agree with Ryan Sager but these California emigrants are really leftizing otherwise sane states like Virginia.


  3. Xrlq Says:

    JJV: forget what the Attorney General says. You know as well as I do that he’s a political figure, not an attorney rendering advice to a paying client. If – no, when the question of what this amendment’s gibberish about “the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities or effects of marriage” means, the AG’s opinion will be given zero weight, and even if it is ultimately held frivolous, he will face $0 in malpractice liability. If you’re going to poll any Virginia attorneys on the issue, poll estate planning attorneys to see how many are willing to bet their law licenses on the possiblity that that legal gibberish won’t actually mean anything. They’ve got skin in the game. The AG doesn’t. Not as an attorney, anyway. As a politician, sure.

    I don’t think you need to lose too much sleep over the prospect of my vote “leftizing” Virginia. According to every poll that’s been conducted, a solid majority will vote for any marriage amendment whose first sentence says only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid, no matter what the second sentence says. I’m voting a straight Republican ticket on everything else.

  4. aphrael Says:

    X: the fact that you will vote for the first and against the second is one of the things I like about you.

    I don’t like the first, but it’s an acceptable compromise position. The second I find infuriating.

Leave a Reply

CommentLuv badge

Subscribe without commenting


Powered by WordPress. Stock photography by Matthew J. Stinson. Design by OFJ.