Does marriage need defending?

Dallas Morning News | Tina Benkiser:

"I feel a little like Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz - life has changed, and I want to go home, where Texans run Texas, where we are free to love God and serve each other and aren't afraid to speak our minds. Yet, I have awakened to liberal Northern activist judges trying to tell 'we the people' what we can do, say and believe."

Maybe Ms. Benkiser (chair of the Republican Party of Texas) is still dreaming. Last time I looked, Texans are running Texas, Texans are free to love God, and Texans are free to speak their minds. Proposition 2 is certainly not going to reinforce any of these freedoms. Rather, if passed, it will deny legal rights to Texans based solely on their sexual orientation.

Her arguments boil down to two -- slippery slope and states' rights. She doesn't really make a case against granting legal rights to gay partners. Instead, she argues that without this Consititutional amendment, we'll have to accept polygamy and incest and arrangements where marriage partners are "bought and sold in a variety pack." She must know that most Texans believe in fair play, so she has to invent extremist outcomes to scare fair-minded Texans into voting for a blatantly discriminatory law.

As for states' rights, passing a Texas Constitutional amendment doesn't change the fact that Texas cannot negate the US Constitution. Like it or not, Texas is bound by the US Constitution, which stipulates that "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State." Passing a Texas Constitutional amendment won't help Ms Benkiser with her states' rights argument, either, but anti-Yankee rhetoric sure plays well in Texas.