4222: Shaking Things Up

[jen_aside]

Really quick, 'cause I know you guys really want a public historical record of me posting links to news:

- North Carolina votes on same-sex marriage amendment with support strong for ban

+ Obama endorses gay marriage

+ Argentina approves transgender rights: ID changes, sex-change operations, and hormone therapyOn the first: I'm still fuzzy on

Comments

[digoraccoon]

I'm guessing that at least for the ones that can afford it, they'd move to areas that do support gay marriage.

[jen_aside]

It's really not that simple a thing to do. "I grew up here." "My family's here." "My [partner]'s family's here." "I like my job." "I like the area [otherwise]." There are so many reasons to stay--besides putting up a defence against it becoming a 100% anti-gay state, say, by being the gay people that anti-gay people know and will have a harder time fighting because there's now a face on the so-called "enemy"--that moving out of principle isn't that easy to do.

Actually, most things are hard to do out of principle alone. It's really inconvenient having to take your ball and go home any time there's a major disappointment.

[digoraccoon]

but at the same time, why stay in a toxic situation? I know there are a lot of reasons to stay, but for some there could be better reasons to go. Some may not have many friends because they're ostrocized for being gay. Some might not have a job and are living on unemployment right now.
Yes, usually it is extremely hard to relocate, but there are a handful of couples that may have it easier to pick up and go if someplace else offers them friends and work.

[jen_aside]

It's difficult to argue generally for something that is definitely case-by-case. You have the well-enough-off who own homes in, say, Minnesota where it's still illegal to marry the same sex who are pretty much affected only in terms of getting legal benefits, while in other cases you will have those who DO find that's the last straw and have no other reason to stay when the next state over is more than happy to oblige their benefits.

Ultimately, it's still just "We are not allowed to get things that other people are allowed to get" more than "Now it's legal to stone us in the streets." It's up to the individuals actually affected to decide what actions to take that they can live with.

[jenova_silver]

It's usually spelled out by the state legislature when an amendment goes to the ballot.