What if, after you were married, you were legally required to produce at least one child by the end of three years or be subject to an annulment? You might say that’s crazy – the government can’t dictate a time span in which couples should reproduce or even mandate that they must. But that’s exactly the legislation that the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance (WA-DOMA) is seeking to pass in its state. This group is promoting an initiative they refer to as I-957, or the Defense of Marriage Initiative.
This initiative, if passed, would make several changes in the legal requirements for marriage. First, the phrase “who are capable of having children with one another” would be added to the official definition of marriage. Second, it would mandate that couples married in the state of Washington verify that they have reproduced within three years of their union or face an annulment. Also, couples married out of state must produce similar verification of having produced their own children within the mandated amount of time. Otherwise, their marriage will be labeled “unrecognized.” The final result of the initiative would legally bar “unrecognized” marriages from receiving marriage benefits.
Well, of course, that’s just completely ridiculous. No one would agree that producing children should be a requirement for marriage. You might be wondering how anyone could be taking this seriously.
On its Web site, www.wa-doma.org, WA-DOMA states that it also finds this initiative absurd. However, it also claims it has “a rational basis for this absurdity.” Basically, WA-DOMA is proposing this initiative to challenge previous legislation that defines marriage made by the state Supreme Court.
In 1998, the Defense of Marriage Act defining marriage as between one man and one woman was passed in Washington. In 2004, a Superior Court judge in King County declared that ruling unconstitutional, and his decision was appealed to the state Supreme Court.
In a 5-4 vote, the Washington Supreme Court decided that the Defense of Marriage Act was indeed constitutional. The plurality opinion stated that “Limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples furthers procreation, essential to the survival of the human race.” The Supreme Court decision also said the law could be repealed by a ballot initiative process if the legislature or the people wished to challenge it.
Apparently, WA-DOMA is attempting to do just that. Through this off-the-wall initiative, the group is hoping to force the legislature to declare it unconstitutional, thereby weakening its previous marriage legislation.
To get this initiative on the November ballot, WA-DOMA needs to get 224,880 signatures on its petition by July 5.
News stations have reacted to this initiative in various ways. Many are treating it as comical or just outright strange. Few seem to treat it with great importance.
The first time I heard about I-957, I was just confused. How could anyone possibly support legislation requiring children to make a marriage legally viable? It didn’t make sense.
After visiting the WA-DOMA Web site, things cleared up a bit. I now understand what they’re attempting, and I suppose they consider themselves brilliant or cunning. However, my feelings toward the initiative have not altered much.
I still find the initiative ridiculous, cunningly worded though it may be. I also find it a paltry device for WA-DOMA to resort to trickery in an attempt to force through legislation. They obviously have no regard for the sanctity of marriage if they are willing to cheapen the institution in such a manner.
The main point that WA-DOMA is challenging is a viewpoint expressed by some that marriage subsists for one function: reproduction. This idea, of course, when put into law, automatically bars same-sex couples from marriage.
I agree that the logic is faulty on that point: The law should not dictate that marriage should only be between couples who can produce children. However, that is not the only reason that same-sex couples are not allowed legal marriage. There is also the language in the 1998 Defense of Marriage Act that states marriage is a union between one man and one woman, which also prohibits same-sex unions by its wording. This language was upheld by the Washington Supreme Court, with the part about marriage for procreation being added.
The WA-DOMA also takes a stab at conservatives on its Web site, stating that it hopes they will choke on their rhetoric about marriage being for the sole purpose of breeding. Although there are perhaps some who believe this, it’s by no means the sole reason conservatives defend marriage as between opposite-sex couples.
However, it’s the easiest wording for WA-DOMA to attack, and so they have. They have found a weakness and will tear at it relentlessly until they force some kind of action to be taken. One can only hope that WA-DOMA’s quest to force a new initiative on legislation that has been denied twice already will not go further than a petition.