Joel shared the following:
> We have some incredible news to share with you today.
Not incredible in the way they think, however.
>The AFL-CIO has added a strong and powerful voice to the chorus
of those opposing to this poorly written and reckless amendment.
Let's look at what was posted (not on the front page of the website, but near the bottom of a second page):
"This constitutional amendment, if passed, would take away some of the bargaining rights of public employees."
Translation: Hets may get hurt.
"Currently many unions have bargained domestic partner benefits into their contracts. These benefits, including health insurance and pensions, covering both opposite and same sex partners and their children."
Hets listed first.
"The ballot language is overly broad and this proposed constitutional amendment takes benefits off the table. Public employees have seen a steady erosion of bargaining rights, items that can no longer be on the bargaining table and this proposal adds to the list."
The amendment is bad because it hurts bargaining rights, not because it discriminates against queers. If you missed that point, the post concludes:
"Futhermore, in Michigan gay marriage is already against the law."
We are already screwing queers over, so what is the need for this amendment which might hurt hets.
So much for the fantasy of supportive unions.
Back to the announcement:
"Enjoy this moment of excitement - but don't ever forget about all of the unmarried couples, both straight and gay, who stand to lose the health insurance and other benefits that they depend upon if Proposal 2 passes."
Again, hets listed first. Can't they ever take a back seat?
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister