Four amendments passed in the Nov. 4 elections from the Florida ballot, and two failed. The Spinnaker picked two that were most significant for college students: Amendment No. 2 and No. 8.
Amendment No. 2: Florida Marriage
“This amendment protects marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized,” as stated on the Florida ballot.
4,885,009 voters marked yes for approval.
“We were in support of the amendment, but we didn’t specifically speak for it,” said Keegan O’Rourke, member of the Campus Ministry Board. “I think it is really important we uphold what is right and good, as a reflection of the natural laws of the creator.”
3,004,584 voters marked no for approval.
“The LGBT center cannot officially endorse legislation, however our PRIDE student union – a student led group of LGBT members – did, and they campaigned against it for a few weeks,” said Richmond Wynn, Interim Program Coordinator. “It is unfortunate … four states decided to write discrimination into the constitution.”
Amendment No. 8: Local Option Community College Funding
“Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution to require that the Legislature authorize counties
to levy a local option sales tax to supplement community college funding; requiring voter approval to levy the tax; providing that approved taxes will sunset after five years and may be reauthorized by the voters,” as stated on the Florida ballot.
4,157,290 voters marked no for approval.
“FCCJ did not take an official position; we were in favor, although we did not actively participate in endorsing the amendment.” said Michael Corby, media relations coordinator at FCCJ.
3,206,359 voters marked yes for approval.
“Through the downturn we have not turned away a single student, and it is really placing a strain on our budget,” said Dr. Steven Wallace, president of FCCJ, who supported the amendment.
Compiled by James Cannon II.
Megan • Nov 26, 2008 at 10:35 pm
The DOMA is already in place which is federal ruling that marriage is defined as a legal union of one man and one woman, but Amendment 2’s illusive wording takes a more progressed form of removing the rights to freedom and protection of those who are in domestic partnerships regardless of whether these relationships are gay or straight. If one looks into the origin of Amendment No. 2, one will find that the majority of its creators and supporters have religious affiliations, and view gay marriage as an attack on the American family, when in reality the gay marriage movement is simply tax paying, law abiding, committed people (regardless of their sex) who wish to be recognized as a monogomous couple and gain equal standing. For instance, if one of the members of a heterosexual married couple gets hurt and goes to the hospital, the law allows the wife or husband to visit and take care of the paperwork and other things that are required, but because gay couples are not allowed to marry, they are refused the ability to visit and take care of legal documents for their partner to whom they are committed.