# Defense of Marriage in Virginia **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 26, 2006, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024 "2006-10-26T21:14:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/41 "2006-10-27T18:41:44Z")
[QUOTE=Blaster Master] You can find it under their FAQs: [http://www.va4marriage.org/faqs.htm](http://www.va4marriage.org/faqs.htm) Look specifically at the questions “Have any other contries legalized same-sex marriage?” and “What, if any, effect, has Scandinavian same-sex marriage had on children?” What concerns me about these arguments is that they seem compelling, but they just say things like “social science research” and don’t give any cites for studies. The only cite they give is to a likely very biased book. Granted, this website is to convince people to vote for the amendment, not have serious debate… so I suppose that explains why. [/QUOTE] I wouldn’t call them compelling. I’d call them “reaching”. And remember that correlation isn’t causation-- it could just the natural trend over time to delay marraige. Besides, no Scandinavian country allows SSM anyway-- civil unions, yes, but not marriage. I call BS on that FAQ. ---
**Author:** ![control-z](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/eada6e/32.png) [@control-z](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/control-z)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/42 "2006-10-27T18:55:46Z")
I’m voting for the amendment, as are many other people who are probably not on this board and/or aren’t interested in getting into long discussions about their position. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/43 "2006-10-27T18:57:47Z")
[QUOTE=Steve MB] I consider it a matter of established fact, based on what happened in Ohio, that many victims of domestic violence would (at best) find it necessary to go through an extra wringer to obtain those protections or (at worst) be denied them altogether. Even the former is unacceptable, given that it would be inflicted as a side effect of an unnecessary measure to ward off a nonexistent problem. [/QUOTE] I think you’ll agree that the amendment is going to pass. What if, a year from now, there are no published reports of any victims of domestic violence being treated differently under this law? Will you then concede you were wrong? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/44 "2006-10-27T19:21:11Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] No. What is your cite for the proposition that any court would interpret that language as you suggest? [/QUOTE] Its a bullshit interpretation Bricker. I don’t like constitutional amendments that limit SSM either but the real argument for allowing them is that the arguments against SSM (or at least civil unions) are fucking retarded. The big problem in Virginia is that Webb, the Dem candidate has a chance of beating the Republican incumbent (Allen, he’s the racist that had some shady stock option deal with a company that was doing government work; the Dem candidate was in charge of the navy during the tailhook incident and has said that women don’t belong in combat) because there is anticipated to be low Republican turnout and high Democratic turnout, this amendment will increase the Republican turnout but will do nothing for the Democratic turnout. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/45 "2006-10-27T19:25:20Z")
[QUOTE=Steve MB] Hokay, let’s use cites, instead… [/QUOTE] I take it back, there is no reason to believe that Virginia Judges cannot be as stupid as Ohio Judges. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/46 "2006-10-27T19:28:01Z")
[QUOTE=Steve MB] Just to confirm before proceeding: I take it that you are formally back-tracking on your original question (“What is your cite for the proposition that **any court** would interpret that language as you suggest?”)…? [/QUOTE] Did you post an overturned decision as a cite? Did you KNOW it was overturned when you posted it? Are you trying to ruin your credibility or does it just come naturally? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/47 "2006-10-27T19:33:25Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] Do you have a good-faith belief that the ultimate result of the passage of the marriage amendment in Virginia will be the loss, as a matter of law, of the protections of Virginia Code 18.2-57.2, for unmarried family or household members as defined in Virginia Code 16.1-228? [/QUOTE] If it happened in Ohio, it can happen in Virginia. BTW, what exactly is the case in Ohio? Was that case overturned or not? Who is making shit up here? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/48 "2006-10-27T19:35:01Z")
[QUOTE=Steve MB] If that were the only problem, the court would need to look no farther than the “…or another person related by consanguinity **or affinity** to the offender” to toss out the defense. At least some of the original and appeals courts didn’t find it so simple; ergo, the can of worms remains. I don’t see any need to open it in Virginia. [/QUOTE] “consanguinity or affinity” means blood or marriage. ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/49 "2006-10-27T19:39:59Z")
On purely intellectual grounds this domestic violence discussion has been interesting. However, it makes me very uncomfortable to hear that even some of the arguments against putting discrimination into a constitution revolve around partners in a relationship beating each other. I know it happens sometimes, but this is still leaving me with a bad feeling. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/50 "2006-10-27T19:46:16Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] I wouldn’t call them compelling. I’d call them “reaching”. And remember that correlation isn’t causation-- it could just the natural trend over time to delay marraige. Besides, no Scandinavian country allows SSM anyway-- civil unions, yes, but not marriage. I call BS on that FAQ. [/QUOTE] What I intended was, if I can see cites to unbiased research indicating that their assertions were true AND is convincing that it is the governments responsibility to fix it, then they are compelling. Lacking this evidence, they are not and so I come to a similar conclusion as do you. [QUOTE=control-z] I’m voting for the amendment, as are many other people who are probably not on this board and/or aren’t interested in getting into long discussions about their position. [/QUOTE] I’m aware that many others are voting for this amendment, including members of my family. What I’m interested in is seeing the perspective of those who support this and why. However, I will add the caveat that I’m not interested in moral or religious arguments because I do not believe in legislating morality. Personally, based on my beliefs, there are a number of things I find immoral, among them, to choose one that is outside of the scope of this argument to avoid tainting it, is recreational drug use. However, provided the user is consenting and not harming anyone else, I think he should be allowed to do that. Similarly, despite whether I find homosexuality moral or not, assuming both of those who are partaking are consenting adults, I see no reason to legislate against it. Can you, or anyone else who supports this legislation, regardless of whether you live in Virginia or not, convince me to vote for this amendment? Can you give any cites or arguments to support the assertion that SSM damages traditional marriage and child rearing in such a way that it becomes the government’s responsibility to correct it? Can you show any kind of negative economic impact by allowing SSM like rising health care costs leading to increased cost of benefits leading to lowered wages? The bottom line is, I like to be educated on my votes when I enter the booth and, on an issue as controversial as this one may turn out to be, I want to make sure I get it right. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/51 "2006-10-27T19:52:06Z")
[QUOTE=col\_10022] If it happened in Ohio, it can happen in Virginia. BTW, what exactly is the case in Ohio? Was that case overturned or not? Who is making shit up here? [/QUOTE] Well, actually, no - because as has already been explained, Ohio’s domestic-violence law was different from Virginia’s. Virginia’s law (Va Code § 18.2-57.2) forbids “assault and battery against a family or household member.” It defines “family or household member” in § 16.1-228 as: > [@](#): > > (i) the person’s spouse, whether or not he or she resides in the same home with the person, (ii) the person’s former spouse, whether or not he or she resides in the same home with the person, (iii) the person’s parents, stepparents, children, stepchildren, brothers, sisters, half-brothers, half-sisters, grandparents and grandchildren, regardless of whether such persons reside in the same home with the person, (iv) the person’s mother-in-law, father-in-law, sons-in-law, daughters-in-law, brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law who reside in the same home with the person, (v) any individual who has a child in common with the person, whether or not the person and that individual have been married or have resided together at any time, or (vi) any individual who cohabits or who, within the previous 12 months, cohabited with the person, and any children of either of them then residing in the same home with the person. Note particularly (vi): "any individual who cohabits or who, within the previous 12 months, cohabited with the person, and any children of either of them then residing in the same home with the person. " Now, in contrast, Ohio’s law says: > [@](#): > > 1. “Family or household member” means any of the following: > > (a) Any of the following who is residing or has resided with the offender: > > (i) A spouse, a person living as a spouse, or a former spouse of the offender; > > (ii) A parent or a child of the offender, or another person related by consanguinity or affinity to the offender; > > (iii) A parent or a child of a spouse, person living as a spouse, or former spouse of the offender, or another person related by consanguinity or affinity to a spouse, person living as a spouse, or former spouse of the offender. > > (b) The natural parent of any child of whom the offender is the other natural parent or is the putative other natural parent. > > (2) “Person living as a spouse” means a person who is living or has lived with the offender in a common law marital relationship, who otherwise is cohabiting with the offender, or who otherwise has cohabited with the offender within five years prior to the date of the alleged commission of the act in question. Note that Ohio’s law is tied to “person living as a spouse.” A redefinition of the law to exclude who can be a spouse might possibly change this section’s application, although I’m confident that ultimately the Ohio courts will find that it does not. Virginia’s law applies regardless: it targets “any individual who cohabits or who, within the previous 12 months, cohabited with the person.” Period. It is NOT subjetc to change based on the amendment. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/52 "2006-10-27T19:53:35Z")
[QUOTE=col\_10022] If it happened in Ohio, it can happen in Virginia. BTW, what exactly is the case in Ohio? Was that case overturned or not? Who is making shit up here? [/QUOTE] I disagree, especially considering that you concur that “consanguinity and affinity” equates to “blood or marriage”, then the laws reflecting domestic abuse in Ohio and Virginia are definitely different. Further, considering that Virginia is derfinately more conservative. If it is still in appeal in Ohio, I can’t imagine it would have a snowball’s chance in Virginia. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/53 "2006-10-27T19:58:09Z")
[QUOTE=Antinor01] On purely intellectual grounds this domestic violence discussion has been interesting. However, it makes me very uncomfortable to hear that even some of the arguments against putting discrimination into a constitution revolve around partners in a relationship beating each other. I know it happens sometimes, but this is still leaving me with a bad feeling. [/QUOTE] I agree. However, what bothers me more is that the opponents of this amendment have to resort to what is essentially scaremongering. As of yet, I think the amendment should be defeated on its own merits, and adding this kind of silliness by either (a) foolishly assuming that different laws in different states with different political views and different judges will necessarily be interpretted the same way or (b) deliberately misinterpretting the law to attempt to scare people in non-marital relationships to think it threatens their livelihood as well. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/54 "2006-10-27T20:11:33Z")
[QUOTE=Blaster Master] I agree. However, what bothers me more is that the opponents of this amendment have to resort to what is essentially scaremongering. As of yet, I think the amendment should be defeated on its own merits, and adding this kind of silliness by either (a) foolishly assuming that different laws in different states with different political views and different judges will necessarily be interpretted the same way or (b) deliberately misinterpretting the law to attempt to scare people in non-marital relationships to think it threatens their livelihood as well. [/QUOTE] I agree, except that I think it’s very little (a) and very much (b). This amendment simply enshrines into the constitution what is already law in Virginia. It will be that much more difficult to remove it later. You should vote for this amendment only if you believe that same-sex couples should be permitted neither marriage nor civil union status in Virginia. It’s unclear what, apart from simple animus towards gays, could motivate such a view. If you believe in limited government, for example – a traditional conservative view – surely you would support the right of two people to contract, between themselves, an arrangement that would approximate marriage. But as you correctly point out, among the many correct arguments against this amendment we do NOT find “it will destroy domestic violence protections for unmarried couples.” That’s not so, and I find it very disturbing that opponents of the amendment feel they have to concoct specious arguments to defeat it. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/55 "2006-10-27T20:25:14Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] I agree, except that I think it’s very little (a) and very much (b). … But as you correctly point out, among the many correct arguments against this amendment we do NOT find “it will destroy domestic violence protections for unmarried couples.” That’s not so, and I find it very disturbing that opponents of the amendment feel they have to concoct specious arguments to defeat it. [/QUOTE] Agreed. Honestly, I was being a mostly facetious with regard to (a); however, I do expect there are some people out there who honestly came to this conclusion. I expect a lot more were convinced by those who deliberately misinterpret to create the specious argument. > [@](#): > > This amendment simply enshrines into the constitution what is already law in Virginia. It will be that much more difficult to remove it later. You should vote for this amendment only if you believe that same-sex couples should be permitted neither marriage nor civil union status in Virginia. It’s unclear what, apart from simple animus towards gays, could motivate such a view. If you believe in limited government, for example – a traditional conservative view – surely you would support the right of two people to contract, between themselves, an arrangement that would approximate marriage. That’s precisely why I expect I’ll vote against it. However, I want people to vote against it for the right reason(s), not because they’re worried about these red herrings, but because they believe in limited government or expanded personal rights of consenting adults. Similarly, I want people who intend to vote for it for the right reasons, not because they morally/religiously or otherwise object to homosexuality but because… well, that’s where I’m lost. I’m still looking for this compelling argument to vote for it. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/56 "2006-10-27T20:28:16Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] But as you correctly point out, among the many correct arguments against this amendment we do NOT find “it will destroy domestic violence protections for unmarried couples.” That’s not so, and I find it very disturbing that opponents of the amendment feel they have to concoct specious arguments to defeat it. [/QUOTE] The argument I have consistently made is that it allows (which, for a population the size of an entire state, pretty much equates to “insures”) that lawyers with less restraint and ethical self-control than present company will (at best) waste the judicial system’s resources or (at worst) actually derail domestic-violence prosecutions. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/57 "2006-10-27T20:31:56Z")
People don’t vote for things for “the right reasons”. This amendment is going to pass because most people in Virginia think that gays are and should be second class citizens. And if, by some miracle it doesn’t pass, it’ll be because its opponents have managed to convince a majority of the voters that there’s some chance this amendment can hurt them to. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/58 "2006-10-27T20:49:24Z")
[QUOTE=Captain Amazing] People don’t vote for things for “the right reasons”. This amendment is going to pass because most people in Virginia think that gays are and should be second class citizens. And if, by some miracle it doesn’t pass, it’ll be because its opponents have managed to convince a majority of the voters that there’s some chance this amendment can hurt them to. [/QUOTE] I don’t disagree with your assessment, and that’s a large part of what bothers me about this amendment… regardless of whether it passes or fails, it will mostly ride on other people’s self-interest. With most other bills and such, I can often at least see a reasoned out and logical argument, and I generally just don’t agree based on political ideology. The problem with this one is, I CAN’T see a logically reasoned out argument supporting this, and even for the side that I do tend to support, most of them are going to do it because they’re scared, not because they believe it’s right. ---
**Author:** ![Orbifold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/779978/32.png) [@Orbifold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orbifold)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/59 "2006-10-27T23:05:55Z")
[QUOTE=Blaster Master] I think the argument is that by allowing SSM, it somehow discourages heterosexual couples from getting married by “demeaning” it. Or, it makes it more socially acceptable to be in a relationship without being married and thus makes having children out of wedlock more acceptable. [/quote] And that is, quite frankly, a stupid argument. To think that allowing homosexual couples to demonstrate their commitment to the principles of fidelity and monogamy before their loved ones and the law somehow “demeans” marriage is just short-sighted and prejudiced. And to think that allowing _more couples to get married_ has anything to do with being in a non-married relationship more socially acceptable is just jaw-droppingly inane. > [@](#): > > I think it is clear that the institution of marriage is starting to come to terms with modern society (more divorces, fewer people even bothering in the first place); but I’m not sure how much, if any, of that is due to homosexuality in general, or SSM more specifically. If I were to take a guess, I’d assign a lot more “blame” to general sexual promiscuity. Even giving this “va4marriage” group’s premise the benefit of the doubt is more credit than it deserves. Put another way, wondering “how much, if any, of that” is due to SSM is shifting the burden of proof from where it rightfully belongs. It is the responsibility of “va4marriage” to demonstrate that there is any kind of causal relationship between SSM and children born out of wedlock. Until they do their ridiculous premise is just so much worthless horseshit. ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2006, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024/60 "2006-10-27T23:30:53Z")
It is the people of VA once again making it clear they don’t want gays in there state. When I lived there they were getting ready to put the question on the ballet. I left VA earlier then expected because I could not legaly defend myself against discrimination that was occour at my work. My BF joined me as soon as he finish at George Mason. VA does nothing to protect homosexuals and has no intention of changing that. They simple continue to ad laws preventing gays to live there comfortably. I know a number of gays who lived in VA and left because the political climate. The gays I know that still live there have little intention of staying long term. I guess VA is being successful in driving us out. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/defense-of-marriage-in-virginia/378024.md?page=4)