Prop 2 Revisited
So the AP reports that the Governor's office is stripping domestic partner benefits of state employees, as "Required by proposal 2" (although Granholm admits that she is personally against the idea, but "must follow the view of the voters.") The reason I bring this up is because the Republican proponents of proposal 2 (including some people I know), Citizens for the Protection of Marriage, and numerous advertisiments on TV and on banners, including banners on doors in my hall, said "Proposal 2 is ONLY (emphasis is original) about Gay Marriage.....it is not about benefits." Well, here we go. I knew this would happen, which is why I voted against it, and on top of all this republican legislators are pushing the UAW to do the same (stop domestic partner benefits). The campaign promise that this would not affect benefits and was only about protection of children and families was a lie--big suprise--and I guess this makes lying a family value (as far as I can see...I mean, it protected families). I know several people who voted for proposal 2 under the impression that it would not affect benefits...it would only protect the family.