How dare you describe it exactly!!
Jul. 30th, 2008 12:05 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
patgundThanks to John Scalzi, who has a pretty good blog post here about it.
Basically the supporters of California's Prop 8, which is intended to eliminate the rights of same-sex couples to marry, are objecting to the language on the ballot, which says the proposition "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry".
It seems that the supporters feel that describing what the measure actually does is "so inflammatory that it will unduly prejudice voters against the measure".
*Faceplant*
Prop. 8 supporters sue over gay marriage ballot language
"As it now stands, California's November ballot will introduce Proposition 8 with these words: "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry." On Tuesday, proponents of the proposition went to court to change that "inflammatory" language, saying it will unfairly influence voters to reject the measure.
"We feel the ballot language is so inflammatory that it will unduly prejudice voters against the measure," said Jennifer Kerns, a spokeswoman for ProtectMarriage.com-Yes on 8. She said Attorney General Jerry Brown had failed in his "job to provide ballot titles and summaries that are fair, accurate and not prejudicial."
I dunno, I think "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry" is pretty fair and accurate as to what the measure is for. But the supporters of Prop 8 want something more indistinct and fluffy like "'Marriage,' or 'Rules Regarding Marriage,'"
As for "prejudicial", the proposition itself is "prejudicial", so the very least the supporters of Prop 8 can do is own the language in their own proposition and stop using waffle words in hopes that people will read something light and fluffy and vote for it anyway.
My right to marry the woman of my choice is in no way threatened by another male wanting to marry his boyfriend, or a woman wanting to marry their girlfriend, and groups like "protectmarriage.com" should stop making stupid claims like that.
Basically the supporters of California's Prop 8, which is intended to eliminate the rights of same-sex couples to marry, are objecting to the language on the ballot, which says the proposition "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry".
It seems that the supporters feel that describing what the measure actually does is "so inflammatory that it will unduly prejudice voters against the measure".
*Faceplant*
Prop. 8 supporters sue over gay marriage ballot language
"As it now stands, California's November ballot will introduce Proposition 8 with these words: "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry." On Tuesday, proponents of the proposition went to court to change that "inflammatory" language, saying it will unfairly influence voters to reject the measure.
"We feel the ballot language is so inflammatory that it will unduly prejudice voters against the measure," said Jennifer Kerns, a spokeswoman for ProtectMarriage.com-Yes on 8. She said Attorney General Jerry Brown had failed in his "job to provide ballot titles and summaries that are fair, accurate and not prejudicial."
I dunno, I think "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry" is pretty fair and accurate as to what the measure is for. But the supporters of Prop 8 want something more indistinct and fluffy like "'Marriage,' or 'Rules Regarding Marriage,'"
As for "prejudicial", the proposition itself is "prejudicial", so the very least the supporters of Prop 8 can do is own the language in their own proposition and stop using waffle words in hopes that people will read something light and fluffy and vote for it anyway.
My right to marry the woman of my choice is in no way threatened by another male wanting to marry his boyfriend, or a woman wanting to marry their girlfriend, and groups like "protectmarriage.com" should stop making stupid claims like that.
